Wise

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL WITKIN, No. 2:19-cv-0974 KJM KJN P Plaintiff, ORDER v. D. WISE, etal., 1S Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Mitchel Witkin filed a motion to alter or amend this court’s judgment. For the 18 reasons described below, the court denies plaintiff's motion. A motion to amend 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)). The motion “is treated as a motion 22 to alter or amend judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) if it is filed [within the 23 time provided by that Rule]. Am. Ironworks & Erectors, Inc. v. N. Am. Constr. Corp., 248 F.3d 24 892, 898-99 (9th Cir. 2001) (citations omitted). Because plaintiff's motion was filed within 25 twenty-eight days of judgment, the court considers this…