United States District Court, D. Oregon
Thi Minh Tran Pro se Plaintiff
Edward Eckelberg Janice E. Hebert U.S. Attorney's
OPINION & ORDER
A. HERNÁNDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff moves for reconsideration of this Court's
August 2, 2017 Opinion & Order, which granted
Defendant's motion to strike 46 pages of documents
attached to Plaintiff's complaint. The Court denies
October 11, 2016, Plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court,
seeking review of an Administrative Law Judge's decision
to deny her disability benefits. Compl., ECF 1. Plaintiff
attached 46 pages to her complaint. Compl. Ex. 1, ECF 1-1.
Defendant Commissioner of Social Security Administration
brought a “Motion to Strike Extra-Record
Evidence” from Plaintiff's complaint.
Court granted Defendant's motion. Tran v. Comm'r
Social Security Admin., No. 3:16-CV-01971-HZ, 2017 WL
3293486, at *1 (D. Or. Aug. 2, 2017). Half of the pages
Plaintiff attached to her complaint are already in the
record. Id. Thus, the Court explained that it would
consider these documents upon review of the
Commissioner's decision. Id. The other half of
the pages had not been presented to the ALJ or the Appeals
Council. Id. at *2. The Court struck these documents
because Plaintiff failed to show that she had good cause for
failing to present the documents to the agency and that the
documents are material. Id. Plaintiff was ordered to
file her opening brief in this case, citing only to documents
in the record, by September 1, 2017. Id.
may seek reconsideration of a ruling under Rule 60(b) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. “Rule 60(b) provides
for extraordinary relief and may be invoked only upon a
showing of exceptional circumstances.” Engleson v.
Burlington N.R. Co., 972 F.2d 1038, 1044 (9th Cir. 1994)
(citation and quotation marks omitted). Under Rule 60(b), a
court may grant reconsideration based on: (1) mistake,
inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly
discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have
been discovered before the court's decision; (3) fraud,
misrepresentation, or misconduct by the adverse party; (4)
the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied; or
(6) any other reason justifying relief. Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b).
However, “[a] motion for reconsideration should not be
granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the
district court is presented with newly discovered evidence,
committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change
in the controlling law.” Marlyn Nutraceuticals,
Inc. v. Mucos Pharma GmbH & Co., 571 F.3d 873, 880
(9th Cir. 2009) (citing 389 Orange St. Partners v.
Arnold, 179 F.3d 656, 665 (9th Cir. 1999)). A motion for
reconsideration “may not be used to raise
arguments or present evidence for the first time when they
could reasonably have been raised earlier in the
litigation.” Id. (quoting Kona Enters.,
Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 890 (9th Cir.
moves for reconsideration of this Court's order.
Plaintiff does not cite any of the Rule 60(b) reasons in
support of her motion. Instead, she contends that the
“Court Transcript Index, ” prepared by the Social
Security Administration for Plaintiff's case,
demonstrates that the ALJ “had already received all
plaintiff's medical history records since 2/28/2012 up
until 2/3/2016.” Pl.'s Mot. Recons. 2, ECF 31.
Plaintiff attaches the entire record (625 pages) from her
Social Security Administration proceeding. Record, ECF 32-1.
Plaintiff fails to provide any reason for this Court to
reconsider its Order, the Court denies Plaintiffs motion.
However, to the extent Plaintiff is worried about which
documents the Court will consider in her case, the Court
assures Plaintiff that it will consider all of the documents
and medical history records that are included in the record.
See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (“As part of the
Commissioner's answer the Commissioner of Social Security
shall file a certified copy of the transcript of the record
including the evidence upon which the findings and decision
complained of are based. The court shall have power to enter,
upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a
judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of
the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without
remanding the cause for a rehearing.”) (emphasis
added). To the extent Plaintiff is once again seeking to
include the 46 pages of documents attached to her complaint,
this Court has already considered and denied that request.
motion for reconsideration  is denied. Plaintiffs opening