Residential Energy Services Network, Inc. v. Building Science Institute, Ltd. Co., et al.

DISCUSSION

13 “Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly 14 discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, 15 or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah 16 Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). BSI primarily argues that it 17 has presented “newly discovered evidence” and “legal decisions” that “came into existence 18 after the injunction issued,” while interspersing arguments about the Court’s supposed 19 misunderstandings. (See ECF 93, at 2.) BSI only asks the Court to reconsider the 20 “likelihood of success” prong of its preliminary-injunction order. (ECF 81-1, at 8.) 21 A. Newly Discovered Evidence 22 23 BSI’s purported “newly discovered evidence” is not “new” by reconsideration- 24 motion standards. A party moving for reconsideration on this ground must “show not only 25 that this evidence was newly discovered or unknown to it until after the hearing, but also 26 that it could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced such evidence at 27 the hearing.” Frederick S. Wyle Pro.…