IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 29, 2011
GUY T. STRINGHAM, PLAINTIFF,
J. BICK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
On March 18, 2011, defendants filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed March 17, 2011, denying their request for an extension of time to object to the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge's ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Specifically, on February 28, 2011, the magistrate judge issued an order denying defendants' motion to declare plaintiff a vexatious litigant. The magistrate judge also issued findings and recommendations, recommending that defendant Murray be dismissed from this action pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On March 16, 2011, defendants filed a request for an extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations. On March 17, 2011, the magistrate judge denied defendants' request and correctly advised defense counsel that no objections on behalf of defendants would be appropriate at that time because the magistrate judge denied defendants' motion by order. The twenty-day objection period which defendants sought to extend pertained to the findings and recommendations to dismiss defendant Murray.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed March 17, 2011, is affirmed.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.