Rodriguez v. Beard et al

Filing 89

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 04/20/16 ORDERING that plaintiff's 88 objections are construed as a request for reconsideration; upon reconsideration, the 87 03/16/16 order of the magistrate judge is AFFIRMED. (Benson, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DEAN C. RODRIGUEZ,

12
13
14
15

No. 2: 14-cv-1049 MCE KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

JEFFREY BEARD, et al.,
Defendant.

16
17

On March 23, 2016, pursuant to the mailbox rule, plaintiff filed objections to the

18

magistrate judge’s order filed March 16, 2016 denying his request for issuance of subpoenas.

19

Plaintiff’s objections are construed as a request for reconsideration. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule

20

303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.”

21

Id. Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate

22

judge’s ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

23

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

24

magistrate judge filed March 16, 2016 is affirmed.

25

Dated: April 20, 2016

26
27
28
1