Balu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ARVIND BALU, Case No. 24-cv-02088-SI

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S v. RULE 59(E) MOTION TO AMEND

THE JUDGMENT

REBECCA DRUCKMAN, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 40 Defendants.

12 The history of this case is known to the parties and was recited by the Court in its prior order from January 7, 2025. See Dkt. No. 38 (“Prior Order”). In the Prior Order, the Court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss on the grounds of res judicata and the statute of limitations. Id. The Court then issued a judgment in favor of defendants. Dkt. No. 39. Plaintiff Arvind Balu timely moved the Court to alter or amend its judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dkt. No. 40 (“Mot.”). The Court withheld ruling on the motion until plaintiff’s separate recusal motion was adjudicated. For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES the motion to amend. 21 LEGAL STANDARD Rule…