Crown Cell Inc. v. Ecovacs Robotics, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CROWN CELL INC, Case No. 21-cv-07890-SI
Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 54, 55 ECOVACS ROBOTICS, INC., Defendant.
12 Plaintiff seeks leave to file a motion for reconsideration of this Court’s order granting in part and denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. Dkt. No. 54. In conjunction thereto, plaintiff seeks an extension of time to file its third amended complaint. (TAC). Dkt. No. 55. Both motions are denied. Under Civil Local Rule 7-9(a), a motion for reconsideration may be granted before entry of judgment adjudicating all of the claims and rights and liabilities of all the parties in a case. Civ. L.R. 7-9(a). A motion for reconsideration may be made on three grounds: (1) a material difference in fact or law exists from that which was presented to the court, which, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, the moving party did not know at…