Muniz

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID L. BAKER, No. 2: 18-cv-1154-KJM-DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER MUNIZ, prison warden, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff’s filing styled “Objection to Order,” ECF No. 14, is before the court. The court construes this filing as a motion to reconsider the court’s order adopting the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge and dismissing the petition as untimely (ECF No. 12). A motion for reconsideration or relief from a judgment is appropriately brought under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or Rule 60(b). Fuller v. M.G. Jewelry, 950 F.2d 1437, 1442 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Taylor v. Knapp, 871 F.2d 803, 805 (9th Cir. 1989)). Plaintiff’s motion was brought within 28 days of final judgment and is thus timely as a Rule 59(e) motion. “A Rule 59(e) motion may be granted if ‘(1) the district court is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) the district court committed clear error or made an…