The only question presented in this case is whether the district court abused its discretion in refusing to accept a supplemental affidavit of an expert filed in support of a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant. At the time the district court ruled on the motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff had not submitted summary judgment evidence establishing the requisite standard of care in this action alleging failure to properly treat and care for the plaintiff. After the court ruled on the motion, the plaintiff *355 then moved for reconsideration and for the first time attached an affidavit purporting to establish the requisite standard of care. At the time the affidavit was filed, the time allotted for discovery had passed and the trial was imminent. Under these circumstances we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to accept the plaintiffs new evidence filed in support of the motion for reconsideration.

AFFIRMED.