Moll v. Telesector Resources Group, Inc.

Filing 81

DECISION AND ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 70 Objections to Magistrate Judge Schroeder's 69 Text Order. Signed by William M. Skretny, Chief Judge U.S.D.C. on 6/29/2010. (MEAL)

Moll v. Telesector Resources Group, Inc.

Doc. 81

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W E S T E R N DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

C IN D Y L. MOLL, Plaintiff, v. TELESECTOR RESOURCES GROUP, INC. d/b/a VERIZON SERVICES GROUP a/k/a V E R IZ O N NEW YORK, INC., D e fe n d a n t. D E C IS IO N AND ORDER 04-CV-805S(Sr)

1.

Plaintiff commenced this employment discrimination action on October 5,

2004. The instant matter relates to Plaintiff's request to extend the Amended Case Management Order. 2. The Court referred this case to the Honorable H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr.,

United States Magistrate Judge, for all pretrial matters and for hearing and disposition of all non-dispositive motions or applications. 3. On October 30, 2009, Judge Schroeder issued a Text Order granting

Plaintiff's Motion to Expedite, but denying her Motion for an Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. (Docket No. 69.) Plaintiff timely filed objections to that portion of the Text Order denying her motion for an extension of time. (Docket No. 70.) 4. This Court will reconsider a magistrate judge's decision on a nondispositive

pretrial matter only "where it has been shown that the magistrate judge's order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Local Rule 72.3(a)(2); Candelaria 1

Dockets.Justia.com

v. Baker, 00-CV-0912E(Sr), 2006 WL 618576, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2006). 5. Having reviewed Judge Schroeder's Text Order, the case history, Plaintiff's

objections, Defendant's response, and Plaintiff's reply, this Court finds no clear error or misapplication of law. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Objections (Docket No. 70) to Magistrate Judge Schroeder's Text Order are DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 29, 2010 Buffalo, New York /s/William M. Skretny WILLIAM M. SKRETNY United States District Judge

2