Humphries v. Button ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 SAGE HUMPHRIES, GINA MENICHINO, Case No. 2:21-cv-01412-ART-EJY ROSEMARIE DeANGELO, DANIELLE 5 GUTIERREZ, JANE DOE 1, and JANE DOE 2, 6 ORDER Plaintiffs, 7 v. 8 MITCHELL TAYLOR BUTTON and 9 DUSTY BUTTON, 10 Defendants. 11 12 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for the Court to Use the Correct Caption 13 and Examine Imperative Facts. ECF No. 329. Also pending is Defendants’ Motion Seeking a Court 14 Order to Remove Juliet Doherty from the Case Caption. ECF No. 342. 15 Juliet Doherty’s name was removed from the case caption and, thus, this request is moot. 16 With respect to Defendants’ inflammatory allegations regarding Ms. Doherty, the Court finds such 17 allegations were unnecessary and unfounded. 18 With respect to Defendants’ request that the Court examine facts, the Court finds this is a 19 motion seeking reconsideration of decisions previously reached. The issue pertaining to the due date 20 for dispositive motions was resolved by the Court’s March 26, 2024 Order. ECF No. 330. 21 Defendants’ dissatisfaction with the Court’s prior decision denying their request for case terminating 22 sanctions and discussion of a police report they claim was withheld from production are arguments 23 previously presented and addressed. ECF No. 327. Defendants offer no new facts, no change in the 24 law, and no support for a finding of manifest injustice. Under Rule 59(e) reconsideration is granted 25 only in highly unusual circumstances when the “district court is presented with newly discovered 26 evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in the controlling law.” 389 27 Orange Street Partners v. Arnold, 179 F.3d 656, 665 (9th Cir. 1999). The Court “will generally not 1 v. U.S. Bank, N.A., Case No. 2:11-cv-01055-JCM-CWH, 2013 WL 211091, at *1 (D. Nev. Jan. 18, 2 2013) citing Lucas Auto. Eng’g, Inc. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 275 F.3d 762, 766 (9th Cir. 3 2001). 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for the Court to Use the 5 Correct Caption and Examine Imperative Facts (ECF No. 329) is DENIED as Defendants present 6 no basis for re-examination of facts. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion Seeking a Court Order to Remove 8 Juliet Doherty from the Case Caption (ECF No. 342) is DENIED as moot. 9 DATED this 12th day of June, 2024. 10 11 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27