January 21, 2011
PACIFIC COAST STEEL, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
TODD LEE LEANY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kent J. Dawson United States District Judge
Presently before the Court is Defendants' Objection to Magistrate's Order (#97). Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition (#99). Objections to the magistrate judge's Order (#93) were filed pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-1 of the Local Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
Defendants are required to demonstrate that the magistrate judge's ruling is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The Court finds that the magistrate's Order (# 93) is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). This Court does not have a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. See Weeks v. Samsung Heavy Indus. Co. Ltd., 126 F.3d 926, 943 (7th Cir. 1997). Magistrate Judge Leen adequately considered the scope of the subpoenas as to both time and entities covered. Furthermore, the magistrate judge gave the appropriate level of scrutiny to the discovery sought in this action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Objections (#97) are DENIED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the magistrate judge's Order (#93) is AFFIRMED.
© 1992-2014 VersusLaw Inc.