THOMAS TUCKER, Bankruptcy Judge
This case comes before the Court on Debtor's "Motion to Re[in]state Chapter 13 Case [No.] 07-63123," filed on December 28, 2007 (Docket # 19), which this Court construes as a motion for reconsideration of the Court's November 30, 2007 Order dismissing this case (Docket # 17).
The Court having reviewed and considered the motion for reconsideration, finds that the motion fails to demonstrate a palpable defect by which the Court and the parties have been misled, and that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof. See Local Rule 9024-1(c).
In addition, the Court notes the following: Debtor is not eligible to be a debtor in the case under 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(1). It provides in relevant part, that
an individual may not be a debtor under this title unless such individual has, during the 180-day period preceding the date of filing the petition by such individual, received from an approved nonprofit budget and credit counseling agency described in section 111(a) an individual or group briefing (including a briefing conducted by telephone or on the Internet) that outlined the opportunities for available credit counseling and assisted such individual in performing a related budget analysis.
The only certificate of credit counseling that Debtor filed with the Court states that Debtor received "an individual [or group] briefing that complied with the provisions of 11 U.S.C. §§ 109(h) and 111" on November 28, 2007. (See "Certificate of Counseling," filed on November 28, 2007 (Docket # 15).) Debtor filed his voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 13 on November 13, 2007. Therefore, Debtor only received credit counseling after his petition was filed. With exceptions not applicable here, 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(1) requires a debtor to obtain credit counseling before filing a bankruptcy petition.
For these reasons, the Court could not reinstate this bankruptcy case even if it were otherwise inclined to do so. The Debtor may file a new bankruptcy case, however; neither this Order nor the November 13, 2007 order dismissing this case bars Debtor from filing a new case.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration (Docket # 19) is DENIED.