Mikolajczyk v. U.S. Government

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:21-CV-71-BO

JAMES MIKOLAJCZYK, ) Plaintiff, V. 5 ORDER UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, Defendant.

On February 14, 2023, this Court dismissed James Mikolajczyk’s (“Mikolajczyk”) complaint [DE 7] and closed the case. See [DE 31]. On June 29, 2023, Mikolajczyk filed a motion for reconsideration. See [DE 32]. On July 6, 2023, Mikolajezyk filed a second motion for reconsideration. See [DE 33]. The government did not file a response. The Court has considered Mikolajczyk’s motions for reconsideration under the governing standard. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e); Zinkand v. Brown, 478 F.3d 634, 637 (4th Cir. 2007); Bogart v. Chapell, 396 F.3d 548, 555 (4th Cir. 2005); Pac. Ins. Co. v. Am. Nat'l Fire Ins. Co., 148 F.3d 396, 403 (4th Cir. 1998); Hughes v. Bedsole, 48 F.3d 1376, 1382 (4th Cir. 1995). Furthermore, Mikolajczyk’s motions fail to meet Rule 60(b)’s threshold requirements and are denied as baseless. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b); Aikens v. Ingram, 652 F.3d 496, 500-01 & n.3 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc); Robinson v. Wix Filtration Corp. LLC, 599 F.3d 403, 412 n.12 (4th Cir. 2010); Nat’l Credit Union Admin. Bd. v. Gray, 1 F.3d 262, 264 (4th Cir. 1993); cf Luxama v. McHugh, 675 F. App’x 272, 273 (4th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (unpublished). The motions for reconsideration [DE 32, 33] lack merit and are DENIED. The case remains closed.

SO ORDERED. This “Uy day of October, 2023.

TERRENCE W. BOYLE opt United States District Judge