Analytical Surveys, Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that a motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle for presenting a case under new theories
• stating that a motion for reconsideration “is not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple”
• finding that a motion to reconsider “is not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle for relitigating previously decided issues or “taking a second bite at the apple”
• “[S]uch a motion ‘is not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple[.]’”
• reconsideration is not a vehicle for presenting the case under new theories

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).