Domain Protection LLC v. Sea Wasp LLC et al, No. 4:2018cv00792 - Document 420 (E.D. Tex. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff Domain Protection's Motion for Withdrawal of May 22, 2020 Sanctions Award (Dkt. # 409 ) and Counsel Gary N. Schepps' Motion to Withdraw Sanctions (Dkt. # 413 ) are hereby DENIED. Signed by District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 6/29/2020. (rpc, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Domain Protection LLC v. Sea Wasp LLC et al Doc. 420 Case 4:18-cv-00792-ALM Document 420 Filed 06/29/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 13442 United States District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION DOMAIN PROTECTION, LLC, Plaintiff, v. SEA WASP, LLC, ET. AL. Defendants. § § § § § § Civil Action No. 4:18-cv-792 Judge Mazzant MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Domain Protection’s Motion for Withdrawal of May 22, 2020 Sanctions Award (Dkt. #409) and Counsel Gary N. Schepps’ Motion to Withdraw Sanctions (Dkt. #413). Defendants filed Defendant Sea Wasp, LLC’s Response to Domain Protection’s Motion for Withdrawal of May 20, 2020 Sanctions Award and Counsel Gary N. Schepps’ Motion to Withdraw Sanctions (Dkt. #419) on June 25, 2020. Having considered the motions and the relevant pleadings, the Court finds that both Motions are DENIED. Motions to reconsider serve a very limited purpose: “to permit a party to correct manifest errors of law or fact, or to present newly discovered evidence.” Krim v. pcOrder.com, Inc., 212 F.R.D. 329, 331 (W.D. Tex. 2002) (citations omitted). Mere disagreement with a district court’s order does not warrant reconsideration of that order. Id. at 332. A party should not restate, recycle, or rehash arguments that were previously made. Id. District court opinions “are not intended as mere first drafts, subject to revision and reconsideration at a litigant’s pleasure.” Verdin v. Fed. Nat’l. Mortg. Ass’n, No. 4:10-cv-590, 2012 WL 2803751, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 10, 2012) (citations omitted). The Court has already considered Plaintiff’s arguments—which have been repackaged in Schepps’ Motion—and found them unpersuasive. Domain Protection and Schepps’ requests are accordingly denied. Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:18-cv-00792-ALM Document 420 Filed 06/29/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 13443 . It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff Domain Protection’s Motion for Withdrawal of May 22, 2020 Sanctions Award (Dkt. #409) and Counsel Gary N. Schepps’ Motion to Withdraw Sanctions (Dkt. #413) are hereby DENIED. SIGNED this 29th day of June, 2020. ___________________________________ AMOS L. MAZZANT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
