Quick

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CORNEL JACKSON, No. 1:19-cv-01591-NONE-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO DENY DEFENDANT’S MOTION

JASON QUICK, et al., (ECF No. 50) Defendants. 16 On January 15, 2021, Plaintiff Cornel Jackson (“Plaintiff”), a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a motion to deny Defendant’s motion. (ECF No. 50). That motion related to Defendants’ motion for an extension of time to file an answer, (ECF No. 47), which the Court granted on January 8, 2021 (ECF No. 49). Because the Court already granted Defendants’ motion, the Court will construe Plaintiff’s instant motion as a motion for reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration is “appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Sch. Dist. No. 1J v. AC & S, 26 …