Cisnero

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLARENCE L. HEARNS, Case No.: 1:22-cv-01033-JLT-CDB (PC) 12 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION

13 v. (Doc. 18) 14 CISNERO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 The Court issued an Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations and Denying 18 Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order. (Doc. 17.) Soon 19 thereafter, Plaintiff filed a “Rule 59(e) Motion” (Doc. 18), seeking reconsideration of the 20 November 8, 2022, order. 21 INTRODUCTION AND LEGAL STANDARD 22 Plaintiff argues the availability of new evidence, the need to correct clear factual or legal 23 errors, and the need to prevent manifest injustice warrant a grant of his motion for 24 reconsideration. (Doc. 18 at 2.) Plaintiff contends the magistrate judge “was unaware that 25 plaintiff’s claim of correctional officials confiscating his JPay-5 Tablet had actually [occurred] 26 before the issuing of the” findings. (Id.) Next, Plaintiff contends the magistrate judge’s findings 27 “overlooked” the…