UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SEAN STRONG, § Plaintiff, : versus : CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:19-CV-3 HILLARY R. MATTHEWS, et al., : Defendants. : MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The court previously entered a Final Judgment dismissing this lawsuit filed pursuant to

. Plaintiff has now filed a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Generally, a Rule 59(e) motion must clearly establish either a manifest error of law or fact or must present newly discovered evidence. Rosenzweig v. Azurix Corp.,

(Sth Cir. 2003); Simmons v. United States,

(Sth Cir. 1990). Plaintiff asserts his pleadings establish a claim for retaliation. While the court agrees that plaintiff asserts a claim for retaliation, the court previously severed that claim into a separate lawsuit. Plaintiff has not presented any new evidence. Further, as plaintiff's claim of retaliation has been severed into another case, he has failed to demonstrate that the dismissal of this lawsuit constituted a manifest error of law or fact. It is accordingly ORDERED that motion to alter or amend judgment (#101) is DENIED. SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 14th day of May, 2025.

□□□ be Ore. MARCIA A.CRONE- UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE