United States District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania
June 9, 2014
IVAN M. CROCKETT, Plaintiff,
ROBERT MILLER, Defendant
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Keith A. Pesto, United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff's "Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment" at docket no. 115, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 59, was referred to me under 28 U.S.C.S 636(b) (3) .
Plaintiff does not suggest an intervening change in controlling law or the availability of new evidence, and does not show the need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice. See Wiest v. Lynch, 710 F.3d 121, 128 (3d Cir.2013) (discussing three purposes of motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59). In his motion, docket no. 115, and brief, docket no. 116, plaintiff reargues the points addressed in the previous Report and Recommendation. The motion should be denied.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 636(b)(1), the parties are given notice that they have fourteen days to serve and file written objections to this Report and Recommendation.