Jillian

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Chandra Kishor, No. 2:23-cv-01584-KJM-JDP Plaintiff, ORDER v. Parvina Ben Jillian, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 This court previously adopted the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to dismiss this pro se civil rights action as frivolous, without leave to amend. See F&Rs, ECF No. 20, adopted, ECF No. 26. A few days after judgment was entered, plaintiff filed the pending motion at ECF No. 28, 20 as well as further objections to the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations, ECF No. 29. The court construes these filings as a request to alter or amend the judgment under 22 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). See Am. Ironworks & Erectors, Inc. v. N. Am. Constr. Corp., 248 F.3d 892, 898-99 (9th Cir. 2001) (a motion for reconsideration is construed as a Rule 59(e) motion if filed by the deadline within that rule and otherwise is construed as a Rule 60(b) motion). …