Noem

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE PEDRO ORTEGA, No. 1:25-cv-01663-DJC-CKD 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 KRISTI NOEM, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Respondents Kristi Noem, et al., move for reconsideration of this Court’s December 23, 2025 order granting Petitioner Jose Ortega’s motion for a preliminary injunction. For the reasons stated below, the motion for reconsideration is denied. Respondents contend that reconsideration is warranted because “the Court’s ruling rested on an incomplete factual record, due to counsel’s mistaken belief that the parole-violation log had been attached to Respondent’s response to the Order to Show Cause.” (Motion (ECF No. 16).) Respondents’ counsel acknowledges that the purported violations “are not new facts and not newly discovered evidence[,]” but that correcting the omission “is necessary to prevent clear error and manifest injustice.” (Id.) 28 The Court disagrees. “Although [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 59(e) permits a district…