Stone v Martel, et al.,

Filing 49

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 06/21/11 ORDERING that the 42 Motion for Reconsideration re Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED; the 35 Order is AFFIRMED. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

AARON P. STONE,
Petitioner,

10
vs.

11
12

No. CIV S-10-3454 KJM GGH P

M. MARTEL, et al.,
Respondents.

13

ORDER
/

14

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for a writ of

15
16

habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 26, 2011, petitioner filed a request for

17

reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s order filed May 5, 2011, denying without prejudice

18

plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel . As provided by E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate

19

judge’s orders shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the

20

file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge’s ruling was clearly

21

erroneous or contrary to law.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of

22
23

the magistrate judge filed May 5, 2011, is affirmed.

24

DATED: June 21, 2011.

25
GGH:014

26

ston3454.850-2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE