Blackburn v. Oklahoma City VA Health Center

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
TYEASHIA M. BLACKBURN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. CIV-22-983-G
)
UNITED STATES, )
)
Defendant. )
ORDER
Now before the Court is Plaintiff Tyeashia M. Blackburn’s Motion to Reconsider
(Doc. No. 121). Defendant United States has filed a Response (Doc. No. 125).
On August 25, 2025, the Court granted—over Plaintiff’s anticipated opposition—
Defendant’s request for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (Doc. No. 37). See Order of Aug. 25, 2025 (Doc. No. 120). Plaintiff now asks
the Court to reconsider that ruling, arguing that Defendant failed to show good cause for
an extension and that the extension reflects an instance of a pro se litigant being unfairly
disadvantaged. See Pl.’s Mot. to Reconsider at 1-6; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
Having reviewed the Motion and the relevant record, the Court does not find that
Plaintiff was unduly prejudiced by the extension. Nor does Plaintiff evince any “clear
error” by the Court in its ruling or show that reconsideration of the Order “is necessary
under the relevant circumstances” or to prevent “manifest injustice.” Servants of the
Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000); Mahoney v. U.S. Capitol Police
Bd., 566 F. Supp. 3d 22, 25 (D.D.C. 2022) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Case 5:22-cv-00983-G Document 162 Filed 04/07/26 Page 1 of 2

2
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider (Doc. No.
121) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of April, 2026.
Case 5:22-cv-00983-G Document 162 Filed 04/07/26 Page 2 of 2