IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
February 6, 2007
SOLOMON L. WALKER, ET AL., PLAINTIFF
HENKELS & MCCOY AND RUSSEL N. WHITSEL, DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner
AND NOW, this 6th day of February, 2007, upon consideration of the motion (Doc. 34) for reconsideration filed by defendant Henkels & McCoy, and the court finding that the motion for reconsideration was not timely filed,*fn1 see L.R. 7.10 ("Any motion for reconsideration or reargument shall be filed within ten (10) days after the entry of judgment, order or decree concerned.") (emphasis added), and that there are no manifest errors of law or fact in the challenged memorandum and order, see Harsco Corp. v. Zlotnicki, 779 F.2d 906, 909 (3d Cir. 1985) ("The purpose of a motion for reconsideration is to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence . . . ."), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 34) for reconsideration is DENIED.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge