Bellinger v. Barnhart

Filing 227

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Neither party brought the pendency of this discovery appeal to the attention of the Court prior to its determination of the summary judgment motion. In any event, the Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Gold's September 28, 2011 order and concludes that it was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law; The appeal is denied. Ordered by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 5/2/2013. (Fernandez, Erica)

Download PDF
FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE U.S. DISTRtCT tOURT F. 11.N.Y. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------X CELIA BELLINGER, * MAY 3 - 2013 * BROOKtYN OFFiCE NOT FOKPUBLICATION MEMORANDUM & ORDER 06-CV-321 (CBA) (SMG) Plaintiff, -againstMICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. -----------------------------------------------------------------X AMON, Chief United States District Judge: On March 28, 2013, this Court issued an order granting defendant's motion for summary judgment in its entirety. (Mem. & Order, D.E. # 223.) On April 19, 2013, defendant submitted a letter requesting that this Court deny an appeal of a discovery order issued by Magistrate Judge Gold on September 28, 2011 that was apparently outstanding. (See Letter Dated Apr. 19, 2013, D.E. # 225 (referencing Sept. 28 Mem. & Order, D.E. # 182; Appeal Dated Oct. 31,2011, D.E. # 187).) Plaintiff opposes the request. (See Letter Dated Apr. 21,2013, D.E. # 226.) Neither party brought the pendency of this discovery appeal to the attention of the Court prior to its determination of the summary judgment motion. In any event, the Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Gold's September 28, 2011 order and concludes that it was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Pall Corp v. Entegris, Inc., 655 F. Supp. 2d 169, 172 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) ("[D]iscovery matters, including issuance and application of protective orders, are non-dispositive decisions governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and the Federal Magistrate Act, 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1)(A) .... Given magistrate judges' broad discretion to resolve nondispositive issues, this Court may overrule such decision only where it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." (internal citation omitted)); Concrete Pipe and Prods. of Cal., Inc. v. Constr. Laborers Pension Trust for South. Cal., 508 U.S. 602, 623 (1993) ("[R]eview under the "clearly errone1 ous" standard is significantly deferential, requiring a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed."). The appeal is denied. SO ORDERED. Dated: May 2, 2013 Brooklyn, New York s/Carol Bagley Amon t Judge 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?