Kelso

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DURRELL ANTHONY PUCKETT, Case No. 1:23-cv-00054-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR RECONSIDERATION

v. (Doc. No. 65) J. BARRIOS, et al., Defendants. 16 On December 29, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s December 19, 2023 Order denying appointment of Counsel. (Doc. No. 65, “Motion”). Plaintiff asks the Court to reconsider its Order because he is suicidal, mentally unstable, suffers hallucinations, and was recently renewed for involuntary “psych meds.” (Id. at 1). Because Plaintiff’s Motion was filed within 28 days of the order being challenged, the Court construes it as made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) permits a party to move a court to alter or amend its judgment. “A district court may grant a Rule 59(e) motion if it ‘is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is…