Hamama v. Adducci ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION USAMA J. HAMAMA, et al., Petitioners, Case No. 17-11910 Hon. Mark A. Goldsmith vs. REBECCA ADDUCCI, et al., Respondents. _______________________________/ OPINION & ORDER DENYING PETITIONER JAFAR MUHSIN ALKURDI’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (Dkt. 673) On November 25, 2020, Jafar Muhsin Alkurdi filed a petition for writ of mandamus (Dkt. 669). On December 23, 2020, the Court denied the petition without prejudice (Dkt. 672). On December 24, 2020, Alkurdi filed a letter regarding his petition for writ of mandamus (Dkt. 673). The Court treats this letter as a motion for reconsideration of the denial of his petition for writ of mandamus. The Court may grant a motion for reconsideration if the movant satisfactorily shows that: (1) a palpable defect mislead the parties and the Court; and (2) correcting the defect would result in a different disposition of the case. E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(h)(3). A defect is palpable if it is “obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest, or plain.” Olson v. Home Depot, 321 F. Supp. 2d 872, 874 (E.D. Mich. 2004). The Court will not grant a motion for reconsideration “that merely present[s] the same issues ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication.” Id. Alkurdi’s motion for reconsideration is identical in all but one respect to his petition for writ of mandamus: the motion for reconsideration includes an additional page in which Alkurdi provides that he didn’t have his Iraqi citizenship documents when he was ordered deported, but he now has them. This additional fact has no bearing on the reasons the Court set out in its order denying Alkurdi’s petition for a writ of mandamus. Because Alkurdi points to no palpable defect, and the Court discerns none, Alkurdi’s motion for reconsideration (Dkt. 673) is denied. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 25, 2021 s/Mark A. Goldsmith Detroit, Michigan MARK A. GOLDSMITH United States District Judge CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court's ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on January 25, 2021. s/Karri Sandusky Case Manager