Bounds v. Paul

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

WILLIE RAY BOUNDS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 20-CV-646

SCOTT PAUL et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER

On August 16, 2021, the court granted summary judgment in the favor of the defendants on the grounds that pro se plaintiff Willie Ray Bounds failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing suit. (ECF No. 46.) Specifically, the court found that Bounds did not resubmit his complaint within 10 days after being notified by the institution complaint examiner that his complaint was not submitted on the proper form. While Bounds argued that the form was unavailable on his unit, the court found that the undisputed evidence that the institution complaint examiner sent him copies of the proper form with her letter notifying him he was not in compliance with the applicable rules and regulations. On October 6, 2021, Bounds filed a motion for the court to reconsider its ruling. (ECF No. 48.) Bounds reiterates that he did not have the available forms. Bounds simply takes issue with the way the summary judgment materials were evaluated and considered. That is not a basis for granting his motion. See Oto v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 244 F.3d 601, 606 (7th Cir. 2000) (holding that a motion that “merely took umbrage with the court’s ruling and rehashed arguments” was properly rejected by the district court). The court denies Barrett's motion for reconsideration. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Bounds’ motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 48) is DENIED.

Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 26th day of January, 2022.

THE COUR / lance NANCY JQSHPI United States Magistrate Judge