Cosey v. USA, No. 2:2011cv00104 - Document 12 (D. Utah 2011)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION denying 11 Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 09/07/2011. (tls)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION EUGENE COSEY, Petitioner, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONER S MOTION TO RECONSIDER vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 2:11-CV-104 TS Respondent. Petitioner moves to reconsider the Court s order denying his Motion for Summary Judgment and granting him an extension of time to file a Reply. He argues that the government did not timely serve him with copies of a filing and, therefore, summary judgment should be entered as a sanction. This argument revisits Petitioner s previous argument that summary judgment should be granted against the United States for its failure to timely serve him with a response and file a certificate of service. Grounds warranting a motion to reconsider include (1) an intervening change in the controlling law, (2) new evidence previously unavailable, and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice. It is not appropriate 1 to revisit issues already addressed or advance arguments that could have been raised in prior briefing.1 The Court has previously addressed Petitioner s arguments.2 His attempt to revisiting those issues does not state grounds for reconsideration. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants Motion for Reconsideration (Docket No. 11) is DENIED. DATED September 7, 2011. BY THE COURT: ___________________________________ TED STEWART United States District Judge 1 Servants of Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000) (citing Van Skiver v. United States, 952 F.2d 1241, 1243 (10th Cir. 1991)). 2 See Docket No. 10 at 2 (finding that any prejudice to Petitioner from not timely receiving a copy of the government s Response can be cured by granting his request for an extension of time in which to file a Reply ) and 2-3 (finding Petitioner has not shown he is entitled to summary judgement). 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.
