Robison v. Hill et al

Filing 71

ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 5/9/12: Upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed April 2, 2012, is affirmed. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

GLEN W. ROBISON,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. 2:10-cv-2954 JAM JFM (PC)

vs.
PARAMVIR SAHOTA, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

ORDER
/

16

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

17

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 16, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion styled “Notice of Motion in

18

Objection to the Court’s Denial for Sanction. The court construes this as a motion for

19

reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s April 2, 2012 order denying plaintiff’s motion for

20

discovery sanctions.

21

Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be upheld

22

unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that

23

it does not appear that the magistrate judge’s ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

24

/////

25

/////

26

/////
1

1

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of the

2

magistrate judge filed April 2, 2012, is affirmed.

3

DATED: May 9, 2012

4
5

/s/ John A. Mendez

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2