Calvin v. Elfo

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 DONALD L. CALVIN, 9 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 2:20-cv-00866-RSM-BAT 10 v. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 11 BILL ELFO, et al., 12 Defendant.

13 Plaintiff moves the Court to reconsider its order denying him his request to be relieved of 14 the requirement that all pleadings be filed electronically. Dkt. 13. Motions for reconsideration are 15 disfavored under the Court’s local rules: 16 Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a 17 showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence. 18 Local Rules W.D. Wash. CR 7(h)(1). A motion to reconsider is an “extraordinary remedy,” and 19 “should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is 20 presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening 21 change in the controlling law.” Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 890 (9th 22 Cir. 2000) (internal citation omitted). 23 As the Court noted in its order denying relief from filing pleadings electronically, all 1 prisoners held in a Washington Department of Corrections (WDOC) facility must file pleadings 2 utilizing the prisoner e-filing procedures. See General Order 06-16. Plaintiff is held in a WDOC 3 facility; he therefore must file his pleadings utilizing the e-filing procedures. Plaintiff originally 4 contended WDOC limits the number of prisoners who can be in the law library at one time. The

5 Court denied relief from electronic filing because the Court continues to receive e-filed pleadings 6 from prisoners held in WDOC facilities, including the facility in which plaintiff is imprisoned. 7 In his motion to reconsider, plaintiff now contends he has no access to the law library or 8 to the law librarian and thus cannot file anything electronically. However, the Court continues to 9 receive electronically filed pleadings from other inmates at plaintiff’s prison and it seems 10 improbable that plaintiff is the only prisoner who cannot file things electronically. 11 The Court accordingly ORDERS the motion to reconsider (Dkt. 13) is DENIED. 12 DATED this 13th day of August, 2020. 13 A 14 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA Chief United States Magistrate Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23