Fins-IPG-23a
Order denying leave to amend complaint (Feb 1998)


                     UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
		     FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


VIGDOR SCHREIBMAN,		:
             Plaintiff,		:
				:
             v.			:	Civil Action No.: 96-1287 (RMU)
				:
DAVID W. HOLMES, et al.,	:
             Defendants.	:	Document Nos.: 11,12,13

					Filed Feb 25, 1998


			MEMORANDUM ORDER
	Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration


	This matter comes before the court upon plaintiff's motion for

reconsideration of this court's memorandum opinion dismissing his

complaint.  Because plaintiff has failed to meet the requirements of

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59, plaintiff's motion is denied [1].

			I. DISCUSSION

	Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for reconsideration

based on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).  "A motion for 

reconsideration is discretionary and should not be granted unless the

movant presents either newly discovered evidence or errors of law and

fact which need correction."  National Trust v. Department of State,

834 F.Supp. 453, 455 (D.D.C. 1993) (internal citation omitted).

Moreover, a motion for reconsideration should not be granted if


----------

1.  In addition, to the motion for reconsideration, plaintiff filed
a motion to change attorney and a motion for leave to amend complaint.
Because plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is denied, plaintiff's
other motions will be stricken.



a party is simply attempting to renew factual or legal arguments that

it asserted in the original pleadings. Id.  "Reconsideration is not

simply an opportunity to reargue facts and theories upon which a

court has already ruled."  State of New York v. United States, 

880 F.Supp. 37, 38 (D.D.C. 1995); see also Association Archives

and Research Center v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 828 F.Supp. 100, 102

(D.D.C. 1993).  In fact, to succeed on a Rule 59(e) motion, a party

must rely on one of three grounds: (1) "intervening change of 

controlling law, (2) the availability of new evidence, or (3)

the need to correct a clear error of (sic) prevent manifest

injustice.  Virgin Atlantic Airways, Ltd. v. National Mediation

Bd., 956 F.2d 1245, 1255 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 820

(1982)..

	Presently, plaintiff has failed to make the requisite

showing.  First, there has been no intervening change of law.

Second, plaintiff has not presented any new evidence that was not

previously available which would alter this court's conclusions.

Lastly, plaintiff's motion has failed to establish an error of

law or fact in the court's memorandum opinion.  Plaintiff's one-

page motion fails to address any of the three required grounds

for a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment.


			II. CONCLUSION

	Accordingly, it is this 23 day of February, 1998,

	ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for reconsideration be and

is hereby DENIED; and it is

	FURTHER ORDERED that all other pending motions are hereby

STRICKEN.


	SO ORDERED.


					(s)
					Ricardo M. Urbina
					United States District Judge