Although not mentioned in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, motions for reconsideration may be considered pursuant to Rules 59(e) and 60(b).[1] In order to succeed on a motion to reconsider, a party must set forth facts or law of a strongly convincing nature to induce the court to reverse its prior decision.[2] A motion for reconsideration is not, however, a mechanism for rearguing issues presented in the original filings, or for “advancing theories of the case that could have been presented earlier.” [3] Thus, Rule 59(e) and 60(b) and are not “intended to give an unhappy litigant one additional chance to sway the judge.”[4]
[1] Hansen v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2:11-CV-01519-GMN, 2013 WL 2322146 (D. Nev. May 28, 2013).
[2] Turner v. High Desert State Prison, 2:13-CV-01752-GMN, 2014 WL 321070 (D. Nev. Jan. 29, 2014) (citing Kern–Tulare Water Dist. v. City of Bakersfield, 634 F.Supp. 656, 665 (E.D. Cal. 1986), aff’d in part and rev’d in part on other grounds 828 F.2d 514 (9th Cir.1987)); see Frasure v. U.S., 256 F.Supp.2d 1180, 1183 (D. Nev. 2003) (citing All Haw. Tours Corp. v. Polynesian Cultural Ctr., 116 F.R.D. 645, 648–49 (D. Haw. 1987), rev’d on other grounds, 855 F.2d 860 (1988)).
[3] Hansen v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2:11-CV-01519-GMN, 2013 WL 2322146 (D. Nev. May 28, 2013) (citing Backlund v. Barnhart, 778 F.2d 1386, 1388 (9th Cir.1985) and quoting Resolution Trust Corp. v. Holmes, 846 F.Supp. 1310, 1316 (S.D.Tex.1994) (footnotes omitted)).
[4] Id. (quoting Durkin v. Taylor, 444 F.Supp. 879, 889 (E.D.Va.1977)).
