CDW LLC et al v. NETECH CORPORATION

Filing 332

ORDER Overrules Plaintiff's Objection 325 Appeal of Magistrate Judge Decision to District Court (S.O.). Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 10/5/2012. (MAC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

CDW, LLC, et. al,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
NETECH CORPORATION,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:10-cv-530- SEB-DML

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ENTRY
(Docket No. 325)
In her August 14, 2012 Entry (Dkt. 323), Magistrate Judge Lynch denied Plaintiffs' motion
to file a second amended complaint to add a new plaintiff, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of
plaintiff CDW, LLC and a sister corporation to the other two plaintiffs. Her denial was based on
an absence of "good cause" as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) due to Plaintiffs' unjustifiable delay
in seeking to amend the pleading (the motion having been filed some 19 months after the deadline
in the Case Management Plan and well after substantial aspects of the litigation and discovery have
been completed) and to the significant prejudice that would befall Defendant if the new plaintiff
were added at this late stage in the case.
Plaintiffs' ten specific objections to the Order, interposed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, are
all premised on identically framed grounds, to wit, in each respect the cited finding by the
Magistrate Judge "is unsupported by the record evidence before the Magistrate Judge and is
otherwise contrary to existing facts." This basis for Plaintiffs' objections does not establish or even
tend to show that the Order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Indeed, our review of the
Magistrate Judge's ruling suggests no basis for such a conclusion that it was in any way clearly

erroneous or contrary to law. The decision was supported by a thorough, well reasoned analysis of
the litigation history and the underlying facts in dispute as well as a correct summary of the parties'
respective claims and defenses. We therefore find no basis to set aside her decision.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Objections are overruled.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date:

10/05/2012
_______________________________
SARAH EVANS BARKER, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana

Copies to:
Electronically registered counsel of record

2