Zsa Zsa Jewels, Inc. v. BMW of North America, LLC et al

Filing 59

ORDER denying 58 Motion for Reconsideration. Ordered by Judge I. Leo Glasser on 1/24/2017. (Weitzer, Iliza)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------x ZSA ZSA JEWELS, INC., Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -against15-CV-6519 (ILG)(RLM) BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al., Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------------x GLASSER, Senior United States District Judge: The plaintiff has moved this Court pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 6.3 to reconsider its Memorandum and Order dated December 27, 2016, DE #57, which dismissed its objection to a Memorandum and Order issued by Magistrate Judge Mann, DE #53. Familiarity with those Memoranda and Orders is assumed. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), authority to hear and determine all pretrial matters in a case pending before the Court was delegated to Magistrate Judge Mann. In the exercise of that authority she denied the plaintiff’s motion to amend the pleadings and add new parties for the findings made and reasons stated in her Memorandum and Order referenced above. That statute provides that a judge may reconsider the Magistrate Judge’s Order where it has been shown that the Order “is clearly erroneous and contrary to law.” In addition, Local Civil Rule 6.3 addressing “Motions for Reconsideration” requires that their claims for relief “[set] forth concisely the matter or controlling decisions the Court has overlooked.” In dismissing the plaintiff’s objection, the Court was mindful of the sensitive implications inherent in most, if not all impositions of sanctions as its citation to National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, 427 U.S. 639 (1976) would suggest. But a de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s Order and of the submissions surrounding it docketed as numbered, 46, 48, 51, 52, 54-56, drive the Court to conclude that there are no matters or controlling decisions that have been overlooked and the Order of the Magistrate Judge is not clearly erroneous and contrary to law. The motion to reconsider is, therefore, denied. SO ORDERED. Dated: Brooklyn, New York January 24, 2017 ______/s/______________________ I. Leo Glasser Senior U.S. District Judge

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?