Brown v. Kinross Gold, U.S.A.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a 27 motion for reconsideration is not an opportunity to “re-litigate the same issues and arguments upon 28 which the court already has ruled”
• relying on Nunes v. Ashcroft, 375 F.3d 805, 807-08 (9th Cir. 2004), and Bregdon v. Nat'l Healthcare Corp., 103 F. Supp. 2d 1322, 1338 (N.D. Ga. 2000)
• relying on Nunes v. Ashcroft, 375 F.3d 805, 807-08 (9th Cir. 2004), and Brogdon v. Nat'l Healthcare Corp., 103 F. Supp. 2d 1322, 1338 (N.D. Ga. 2000)
• “A motion for reconsideration is not an avenue to re-litigate the same issues and arguments upon which 26 the court already has ruled.”
• “A motion for reconsideration is not 5 an avenue to re-litigate the same issues and arguments upon which the court already has 6 ruled.”
• “A motion for reconsideration is not 12 an avenue to re-litigate the same issues and arguments upon which the court already has 13 ruled.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).