(PC) Kendrid v. Singh ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FORREST KENDRID, No. 2:19-CV-1944-JAM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 KARANDEEP SINGH, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a civil detainee proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 16) for 19 reconsideration of the court’s January 8, 2020, order (ECF No. 8). 20 The court may grant reconsideration of a final judgment under Federal Rules of 21 Civil Procedure 59(e) and 60. Generally, a motion for reconsideration of a final judgment is 22 appropriately brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). See Backlund v. Barnhart, 23 778 F.2d 1386, 1388 (9th Cir. 1985) (discussing reconsideration of summary judgment); see also 24 Schroeder v. McDonald, 55 F.3d 454, 458-59 (9th Cir. 1995). 25 Under Rule 60(a), the court may grant reconsideration of final judgments and any 26 order based on clerical mistakes. Relief under this rule can be granted on the court’s own motion 27 and at any time. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a). However, once an appeal has been filed and 28 docketed, leave of the appellate court is required to correct clerical mistakes while the appeal is 1 | pending. See id. 2 Under Rule 60(b), the court may grant reconsideration of a final judgment and any 3 | order based on: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered 4 | evidence which, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered within ten days of 5 | entry of judgment; and (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct of an opposing party. See Fed. 6 | R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1)-(3). A motion for reconsideration on any of these grounds must be brought 7 | within one year of entry of judgment or the order being challenged. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1). 8 | Under Rule 60(b), the court may also grant reconsideration if: (1) the judgment is void; (2) the 9 | judgement has been satisfied, released, or discharged, an earlier judgment has been reversed or 10 | vacated, or applying the judgment prospectively is no longer equitable; and (3) any other reason 11 | that justifies relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4)-(6). A motion for reconsideration on any of these 12 | grounds must be brought “within a reasonable time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1). 13 In this case, plaintiff seeks reconsideration because the court referred to him as a 14 | “prisoner” instead of “civil detainee.” According to plaintiff's complaint, he is indeed a civil 15 | detainee pursuant to California Penal Code § 1026. Given the clerical error contained in the 16 | court’s order, reconsideration under Rule 60(a) is warranted and plaintiff's motion will be 17 || granted. Plaintiff will in future be referred to as a “civil detainee.” Substantively, the court’s 18 | January 8, 2020, order remains in effect. 19 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for 20 || reconsideration (ECF No. 16) is granted to the extent the court made a clerical error in referring 21 | to plaintiff as a “prisoner” instead of a “civil detainee.” 22 23 24 | Dated: February 13, 2020 Sx