Nehemiah Robinson v. T. CATLETT, Sergeant;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NEHEMIAH ROBINSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
T. CATLETT, Sergeant; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-56885
D.C. No. 3:08-cv-00161-H-BLM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, AND BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Nehemiah Robinson appeals pro se from the district
court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
alleging that defendants delayed assigning him to a lower bunk, confiscated his
FILED
FEB 29 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-56885 2
cane, denied him pain medication, and retaliated against him. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Nunes v. Ashcroft,
375 F.3d 805, 807 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Robinson’s
post-judgment motion because Robinson failed to show any newly discovered
evidence, intervening change in controlling law, clear error, or manifest injustice.
See id. at 807-08 (setting forth grounds justifying reconsideration).
Robinson’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --