Hi. You say those facts were "previously ignored." If they were considered in the motion and dismissed in making the ruling then they are not new facts. If not, then they should be considered new facts. Here is a list of case decisions as they interpreted the definition of "new facts" under CCP 1008(b). This should give you the direction you are looking for and the laaw to support it. Good luck!
New or different factsEmployee who was deemed a vexatious litigant, and whose wrongful termination case was dismissed based on her failure to obtain new counsel after her previous counsel withdrew, failed to show new facts or circumstances in support of her motion for reconsideration of dismissal of the case; although employee hired substitute counsel after the dismissal, such postdismissal compliance with trial court's order was not the type of new fact that would support reconsideration. Forrest v. State Of California Dept. Of Corporations (App. 2 Dist. 2007) 58 Cal.Rptr.3d 466, 150 Cal.App.4th 183. Pretrial Procedure
Lawyer (JD)
Liscensed to practice law in CA and TX. CA State Bar Exam grader. 10 yrs. Litigation Exp.