Lee Malvo v. Harold Clarke, et al.

Opinion

CLERK'S OFFICE U.S. DIST. CO AT HARRISONBURG, VA FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT November 12, 2025 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA =| aura A. AUSTIN, CLER DEPUTY CLERK LEE MALVO, ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 7:23cv00535 ) v. ) OPINION and ORDER ) HAROLD CLARKE, et al., ) By: Robert S. Ballou Defendants. ) United States District Judge

Plaintiff Lee Malvo, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a Motion for Reconsideration of this court’s order entered September 15, 2025, dismissing Counts 1 and 4 of Malvo’s suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Because Malvo has not identified any proper grounds for reconsideration, I will deny his motion. Rule 59(e) motions will be granted in three circumstances: (1) to accommodate an intervening change in controlling law; (2) to account for new evidence not available at trial; or (3) to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice. Ingle ex rel. Estate of Ingle v. Yelton, 439 F.3d 191, 197 (4th Cir. 2006). Malvo has alleged only that Counts 1 and 4 are “paramount” to his case. He has offered no evidence or argument that the law has changed or that the court’s decision involved a clear error of law. His Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. No. 55) is DENIED.

Enter: November 11, 2025 lol Kole S: Ballow Robert S. Ballou United States District Judge