Brown v. Stroud et al

Filing 398

ORDER re Briefing on 387 MOTION For Relief From Nondispositive Pretrial Order re 335 Order filed by Andrew B. Stroud. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 4/3/2012. (hlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 STEVEN AMES BROWN, 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 Plaintiff, v. 13 ORDER RE BRIEFING ON DEFENDANTS’ “MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER” ANDREW B. STROUD, et al., 14 No. C 08-02348 JSW (DMR) Defendants. ___________________________________/ 15 16 The court is in receipt of Defendants Andrew Stroud and Stroud Productions and Enterprises, 17 Inc.’s “Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order (Dkt # 335) per Local Rule 72-2.” 18 [Docket No. 387.] The motion seeks relief from the court’s September 26, 2011 order requiring 19 Melissa Newel, counsel for Stroud, to travel from California to New York to assist Stroud personally 20 in identifying and producing additional recordings in his possession. Although the motion is styled 21 as a motion for relief pursuant to Civil Local Rule 72-2, which governs objections to an order of a 22 Magistrate Judge, the court notes that Defendants submitted a proposed order for signature by the 23 undersigned Magistrate Judge rather than the presiding District Judge. [Docket No. 391.] The court 24 further notes that Defendants filed the motion more than 14 days after entry of the September 26, 25 2011 order, making any objections to that order untimely pursuant to FRCP 72(a). The court 26 therefore construes Defendants’ motion as a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration 27 pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9. The court hereby GRANTS Defendants leave to file the motion 28 for reconsideration. 1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9(d), the court hereby orders that any opposition to 2 Defendants’ motion for reconsideration may not exceed three (3) pages in length and must be filed 3 by April 6, 2012, after which the matter will be taken under submission and may be decided without 4 oral argument. No reply brief may be filed. If the court determines that a hearing is necessary, it 5 will notify the parties of the time and date of hearing. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 Dated: April 3, 2012 9 DONNA M. RYU United States Magistrate Judge 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?