Patriot Rail Corp. v. Sierra Railroad Company

Filing 762

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/23/16 ORDERING that the Request for Reconsideration 757 is DENIED for non-compliance with Local Rule 303. The Request To Seal (ECF No. 758 ), is DENIED as moot. Pacific's time for filing a request for reconsideration of ECF No. 730 , is EXTENDED to 14 days from the date of this order. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PATRIOT RAIL CORP.,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:09-cv-0009 TLN AC

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

SIERRA RAILROAD CO.,
Defendant.

16
17
18

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS
Counter-defendant Pacific Rail LLC (a/k/a Patriot Rail LLC) (“Pacific”), seeks

19

reconsideration of ECF No. 730, the undersigned’s February 9, 2016 discovery order. ECF

20

No. 757. This court’s Local Rules provide for reconsideration of such orders either by the

21

magistrate judge who issued it or by the district judge presiding over the case. E.D. Cal.

22

R. (“Local Rule”) 303(b), (c).

23

Pacific, however, seeks reconsideration by “the Magistrate and/or the District Court.”

24

ECF No. 757 at 2. Although Pacific avers that it has done so “to ensure compliance with Local

25

Rule 303,” it has in fact ensured non-compliance with that Local Rule. There is no provision in

26

the Local Rules for reconsideration by both judges at the same time, nor is there a provision for

27

the judges to determine which one will decide the request. The request will therefore be denied

28

for failure to comply with Local Rule 303. Pacific is advised that it is free to file a new request
1

1

for reconsideration that complies with the Local Rules, and that seeks reconsideration either from

2

the magistrate judge or the district judge, but not from both.

3

Pacific has indicated that it “believes that the issue is best addressed in the first instance

4

by the Magistrate . . ..” The undersigned will be pleased to decide the matter upon presentation of

5

a proper request that complies with the Local Rules. However, if Pacific chooses to submit the

6

request to the district judge, it still must comply with the Local Rules, including Local

7

Rule 303(c), which specifies the caption that must be used.

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1. The Request for Reconsideration (ECF No. 757), is DENIED for non-compliance with

10

Local Rule 303.

11

2. The Request To Seal (ECF No. 758), is DENIED as moot.

12

3. Pacific’s time for filing a request for reconsideration of ECF No. 730, is EXTENDED

13

to 14 days from the date of this order.

14

DATED: February 23, 2016

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2