Sharma et al v. BMW of North America LLC
Filing
144
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Plaintiffs' Objections are denied, without prejudice to plaintiffs' filing, before Magistrate Judge Westmore and no later than April 15, 2016, a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on April 1, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2016)
1
2
3
4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
MONITA SHARMA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
10
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA LLC,
Defendant.
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No. 13-cv-02274-MMC
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT
PREJUDICE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION
FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE
JUDGE
Re: Dkt. No. 143
12
Before the Court is plaintiffs' "Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order
13
14
of Magistrate Judge" ("Objections"), filed March 29, 2016, by which plaintiffs object to
15
Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore's order of March 15, 2016, to the extent such
16
order denies in part plaintiffs' request for discovery regarding electronic components
17
other than the three components identified by name in the operative complaint. Having
18
read and considered the motion, the Court rules as follows.
Plaintiffs argue that certain findings set forth in the challenged order are based on
19
20
"inaccurate information and misrepresentations" made by defendant (see Pls.' Objections
21
at 1:6-15), and, consequently, are clearly erroneous. Plaintiffs do not contend, however,
22
that the challenged findings are erroneous based on the record as presented to
23
Magistrate Judge Westmore, but, rather, that said findings should be found erroneous
24
based on evidence submitted for the first time in support of the instant Objections. (See
25
Pls' Objections at 1:11-15; 3:3 - 4:6; 5:4-15.) Under such circumstances, plaintiffs'
26
Objections are, in essence, a motion for reconsideration based on newly-offered
27
evidence.
28
//
1
Accordingly, plaintiffs' Objections are hereby DENIED, without prejudice to
2
plaintiffs' filing, before Magistrate Judge Westmore and no later than April 15, 2016, a
3
motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. See Civil L.R. 7-9(b)(2).
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
Dated: April 1, 2016
7
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
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?