IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
March 17, 2009
RORY M. WALSH, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NATURAL GUARDIAN OF C.R.W., PLAINTIFF
DR. ROBERT KRANTZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner
AND NOW, this 17th day of March, 2009, upon consideration of pro se plaintiff's motion (Doc. 139) for reconsideration of the order of court (Doc. 130) dated February 11, 2009, which denied plaintiff's appeal (Doc. 122) from the magistrate judge's order (Doc. 121) of January 20, 2009, and the court finding that there are no manifest errors of law or fact in the challenged order,*fn1 see Harsco Corp. v. Zlotniki, 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...."); see also Max's Seafood Café by Lou-Ann, Inc. v. Quinteros, 176 F.3d 669, 677 (3d Cir. 1999), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 139) for reconsideration is DENIED.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge