Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 174

ORDER denying 150 Motion for Reconsideration of motion to compel production of documents. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on December 18, 2009. (cnn)

Download PDF
Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al Doc. 174 Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 174 Filed 12/18/09 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION JOHN WARD, JR. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. ORDER Now on this 18th day of December, 2009, comes on for Civil No. 08-4022 DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF consideration Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Motion and Brief for District Judge to Reconsider Magistrate Judge's Order Denying Cisco's Motion to Compel Production of Documents (document #150) and the response and thereto. The Court, being well and sufficiently advised, finds and orders as follows: 1. On November 2, 2009, the Court referred Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Motion to Compel Responses to Cisco System, Inc.'s First Request for Production and Brief in Support Thereof (document #101) to United States Magistrate Judge Erin L. Setser. 2. Following a telephonic hearing, Judge Setser entered an Order, on November 4, 2009, granting in part, and denying in part the motion to compel (document #138). 3. On November 16, 2009, Defendant Cisco filed two (2) motions seeking reconsideration of Judge Setser's Order: * the instant motion, Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Motion and Brief Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 174 Filed 12/18/09 Page 2 of 3 for District Judge to Reconsider Magistrate Judge's Order Denying Cisco's Motion to Compel Production of Documents (document #150); and, * Judge to Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Motion and Brief for Magistrate Reconsider Order Denying Cisco's Motion to Compel Production of Documents Based on Misrepresentations to the Court (document #151). 4. In addition to the issues concerning defendant's Requests for Production Nos. 4, 5, 9, 11, and 17 presented to Judge Setser in document #151, Cisco also seeks reconsideration of Judge Setser's ruling concerning defendant's Request for Production No. 12. 5. According to 28 U.S.C. 636, this Court may reconsider a ruling of a Magistrate Judge pretrial matters "where it has been shown that the magistrate judge's order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." (8th Cir. 2007). 6. The Court, having reviewed the instant motion, the See also Ferguson v. U.S., 484 F.3d 1068, 1077 plaintiff's response, and Judge Setser's rulings on both documents #101 and #151, finds no evidence that Judge Setser's ruling on document #101 is clearly erroneous or contrary to the law, and therefore, finds that Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Motion and Brief for District Judge to Reconsider Magistrate Judge's Order Denying -2- Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 174 Filed 12/18/09 Page 3 of 3 Cisco's Motion to Compel Production of Documents (document #150) should be, and hereby is, DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Jimm Larry Hendren JIMM LARRY HENDREN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -3-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?