United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Troy Adam Shade, an inmate at SCI - Retreat in Hunlock Creek,
Pennsylvania, filed this civil action on February 14, 2019.
(D.I. 1). On May 23, 2018, the Court entered an order for
Plaintiff to sign and return an authorization form so that
the agency having custody of him could forward all filing fee
payments as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) to the
Clerk of Court. (D.I. 6). Plaintiff was given thirty days
from the date the order was sent to submit the authorization
form and advised the case would be dismissed for his failure
to do so. (Id.). After Plaintiff failed to file the
authorization, an order was entered on July 9, 2019
dismissing the case. (D.I. 7). Plaintiff filed an objection
to dismissal of the complaint, construed as a motion for
reconsideration. (D.I. 8).
purpose of a motion for reconsideration is to "correct
manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered
evidence." Max's Seafood Cafe ex rel.
Lou-Ann, Inc. v. Quinteros, 176 F.3d 669, 677
(3d Cir. 1999). "A proper Rule 59(e) motion . . . must
rely on one of three grounds: (1) an intervening change in
controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence; or (3)
the need to correct clear error of law or prevent manifest
injustice." Lazaridis v. Wehmer, 591 F.3d 666,
669 (3d Cir. 2010). A motion for reconsideration is not
properly grounded on a request that a court rethink a
decision already made. See Glendon Energy Co. v. Borough
of Glendon, 836 F.Supp. 1109, 1122 (E.D. Pa. 1993).
Motions for reargument or reconsideration may not be used
"as a means to argue new facts or issues that
inexcusably were not presented to the court in the matter
previously decided." Brambles USA, Inc. v.
Blocker, 735 F.Supp. 1239, 1240 (D. Del. 1990).
Reargument, however, may be appropriate where "the Court
has patently misunderstood a party, or has made a decision
outside the adversarial issues presented to the court by the
parties, or has made an error not of reasoning but of
apprehension." Brambles USA, 735 F.Supp. at
1241; see also D. Del. LR 7.1.5.
filed this action against the Acting Clerk of Court for the
United States District Court for the Middle District of
Pennsylvania and the Clerk's Office for the same
district, both of whom are federal defendants. (D.I. 1).
Where a litigant sues federal actors for damages on
constitutional grounds, the claim is governed by Bivens
v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of
Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 389 (1971). A Bivens
action is "a judicially created remedy allowing
individuals to seek damages for unconstitutional conduct by
federal officials" and is federal tort counterpart to
the remedy created by 42 U.S.C. § 1983, applied to
federal officers. Banks v. Roberts, 251 Fed.Appx.
774, 775 (3d Cir. 2007). When the Court entered the dismissal
order, it mistakenly referred to Plaintiffs claim as a
"civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983" rather than a Bivens civil rights action.
argues that his case is not a § 1983 action but is an
action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §351 and jurisdiction
lies under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 pursuant to a federal
question. While not clear, Plaintiff appears to argue his
action does not fall under the filing fee requirements of the
Prison Litigation Reform Act. (D.I. 8 at ¶¶ 10,
351 refers to complaints that allege a judge has engaged in
conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious
administration of the business or the courts. See 28
U.S.C. § 351(a). It is clearly inapplicable to the
instant case given that Plaintiff did not name a judge as a
defendant. Nor did Plaintiff commence this action by filing
it with the clerk of the court of appeals for the circuit as
is procedurally required. (Id.).
§ 1915(b)(1), if a prisoner brings a civil action in
forma pauperis, the prisoner is required to pay the full
amount of a filing fee. In addition the court must assess
and, when funds exist, collect, as a partial payment of any
court fees required by law, an initial partial filing fee of
20 percent of the greater of the average monthly deposits to
the prisoner's account, or the average monthly balance in
the prisoner's account for the 6-month period immediately
preceding the filing of the complaint.
commenced this action and he is required to pay the filing
fee. Therefore, his motion for reconsideration will be
denied. Plaintiff will be given additional time to submit his
above reasons, the Court will deny the motion for
reconsideration. (D.I. 8).
appropriate order will be entered.