Opinion
4:05CV3134.
December 22, 2005
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On December 13, 2005, Magistrate Judge Piester entered an order (filing 25) that granted in part a joint motion to modify the case progression schedule by extending certain time periods. On December 19, 2005, Defendant filed a statement of appeal (filing 28) because the summary judgment deadline was not extended, as had been requested by the parties. Upon careful review, conducted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a), and NECivR 72.2, I find that the challenged order is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Therefore,
Because Defendant's filing is specifically designated as a statement of appeal filed pursuant to NECivR 72.2, I will notsua sponte treat the filing as a motion for reconsideration directed to Judge Piester under NECivR 60.1.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's statement of appeal (filing 28) is denied.
2. The Magistrate Judge's order entered on December 13, 2005 (filing 25), is sustained and shall not be disturbed.