Young v. Qureshi

Filing 43

ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 3/19/18 ORDERING that, upon reconsideration, the order of the Magistrate Judge filed 11/20/17 is AFFIRMED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

DANNY GEROME YOUNG,

7

Plaintiff,

8
9

No. 2: 15-cv-2674 JAM KJN P

v.

ORDER

MUHAMMAD QURISHI, et al.,

10

Defendant.

11
On December 11, 2017, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate

12
13

judge’s order filed November 20, 2017 granting plaintiff’s motion to amend the scheduling

14

order.1 (ECF No. 38.) Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be

15

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

16

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

17

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

18
19

magistrate judge filed November 20, 2017 is affirmed.

20

DATED: March 19, 2018

21

/s/ John A. Mendez_______________________

22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff objects to the magistrate judge’s order extending the discovery and dispositive motion
deadlines for both plaintiff and defendants.
1