Dong v. BASF Corporation et al

Filing 51

ORDER denying 50 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Magistrate Judge David C. Keesler on 5/17/2013. (chh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11-CV-605-MOC-DCK
YAN DONG,
Plaintiff,
v.
BASF CORPORATION and
JONATHAN ANTONUCCI,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Plaintiff Yan Dong’s Motion To
Alter or Amend Judgment” (Document No. 50) filed May 17, 2013. This motion has been
referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate
review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and applicable
authority, the undersigned will deny Plaintiff’s motion.
Plaintiff essentially requests that the undersigned reconsider and amend a previous
“Order” (Document No. 48) which denied: “Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension Of Time To
Complete Discovery” (Document No. 37);

“Plaintiff’s Motion To Compel Defendants To

Comply With This Court’s March 19, 2013 Order” (Document No. 38); and “Plaintiff’s Motion
To Compel Defendants To Produce Documents Responsive To Plaintiff’s Third Document
Production Request” (Document No. 46). Plaintiff’s request to reconsider and/or amend fails to
present any persuasive or new information suggesting that the Court’s previous Order was in
error. (Document No. 50).
The undersigned further notes that Plaintiff’s response to Defendants’ pending summary
judgment motion is due by May 31, 2013, and that Judge Cogburn will hold a hearing in this

matter on June 19, 2013. See (Document No. 49). As such, the undersigned again respectfully
advises Plaintiff that “the time for discovery has passed, and this matter is now ripe for
adjudication by summary judgment and/or trial.” (Document No. 48, p.4).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED “Plaintiff Yan Dong’s Motion To Alter or Amend
Judgment” (Document No. 50) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: May 17, 2013

2