UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
June 18, 2009
IRVING MASON, PETITIONER,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: John F. Keenan, United States District Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Before the Court is incarcerated pro se petitioner Irving Mason's motion for reconsideration of the Court's order denying Mason's Rule 60(b)(4) motion and his request for the appointment of counsel. For the reasons set forth below, Mason's motion for reconsideration is denied.
The relevant background is discussed in the challenged opinion. Mason v. United States, No. 04 Civ. 2198, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38915 (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2009). Mason timely moved for reconsideration of that opinion on May 15, 2009.
Local Civil Rule 6.3 permits motions for reconsideration so that the parties may bring to the court's attention "matters or controlling opinions which counsel believes the court has overlooked." S.D.N.Y. R. 6.3. Rule 6.3 is strictly construed in order to spare the Court the time-wasting task of considering repetitive arguments on decided issues. See, e.g., Dietrich v. Bauer, 76 F. Supp. 2d 312, 327 (S.N.N.Y. 1999). The decision to deny a motion for reconsideration is at the court's discretion and will not be overturned on appeal absent a finding of abuse of that discretion. RMED Int'l, Inc. v. Sloan's Supermarkets, Inc., 207 F. Supp. 2d 292, 295 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
Mason fails to cite any controlling decisions that the Court overlooked in rendering its earlier opinion. Therefore, his motion for reconsideration is denied.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.