Nuradin Ahmed v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[r]econsideration is not an appropriate forum for rehashing previously rejected arguments or arguing matters that could have been heard during the pendency of the previous motion”
• holding that “[r]econsideration is not an appropriate forum for rehashing previously rejected arguments or arguing matters that could have been heard during the pendency of the previous motion” (citation omitted)
• noting that “review of the denial of a motion to reconsider is highly deferential”
• filing a motion to reconsider does not toll the time for seeking judicial review of the underlying order
• reconsideration not proper for “rehashing previously rejected arguments or arguing matters that could have been heard during the pendency of the previous motion”
• “[r]econsideration is not an appropriate forum for rehashing previously rejected arguments or arguing matters that could have been heard during the pendency of the previous motion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).