Opinion
22-CV-1742 (JMF)
01-12-2023
RHONDA WOITOVICH, Plaintiff, v. LYDIA SCHOENFELD, Defendant.
ORDER
JESSE M. FURMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
On December 28, 2022, the Court issued an Opinion and Order granting in part Defendant's motion to dismiss. ECF No. 45. On January 11, 2023, Plaintiff submitted a motion for reconsideration of that Order. ECF No. 49. Plaintiff's motion merely reargues the same points that the Court considered and rejected in its Opinion and presents no valid grounds for reconsideration. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED as meritless. See, e.g., Analytical Survs., Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P., 684 F.3d 36, 52 (2d Cir. 2012) (“It is well-settled that [a motion for reconsideration] is not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple. Rather, the standard for granting a . . . motion for reconsideration is strict, and reconsideration will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked.” (cleaned up)).
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 49.
SO ORDERED.