Gartrell v. J.J. Marshall & Associates, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

JACARA MONIQUE GARTRELL, on behalf of Herself and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:19-cv-442-TJC-JBT

J.J. MARSHALL & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER This case is before the Court on Defendant J.J. Marshall & Associates, Inc.’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 60). Plaintiff Jacara Gartrell filed a response (Doc. 62), to which Defendant filed a Reply (Doc. 64). Reconsideration of a prior decision is justified if the movant identifies: “(1) an intervening change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence; [or] (3) the need to correct clear error or manifest injustice.” Fla. Coll. of Osteopathic Med., Inc. v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 12 F. Supp. 2d 1306, 1308 (M.D. Fla. 1998). A motion to reconsider must “raise new issues, not merely readdress issues previously litigated.” Id. Defendant’s motion simply reiterates its previous arguments. If Defendant wishes to contest standing it may do so in response to the Amended Complaint. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED: Defendant J.J. Marshall’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. Defendant shall respond to the Amended Complaint (Doc. 59) no later than May 7, 2021. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida the 16th day of April, 2021.

o> Cimotheg 9. Corrig aon TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN = United States District Judge

aghb Copies: Counsel of record