Joan Glazer Margolis United States Magistrate Judge

RULING FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

Familiarity is presumed with this Magistrate Judge's Ruling on Defendant's Motion to Compel, filed February 10, 2015 (Dkt. #138)["February 2015 Discovery Ruling"], in which this Magistrate Judge ordered an in camera review of the "handful of documents" to which plaintiffs asserted a privilege. The parties previously had provided a copy of plaintiffs' Log of Documents Withheld on the Basis of Privilege or Work Product Protection, dated October 22, 2014 (Dkt. #132, Exh. C), as well as six pages of redacted e-mails and two pages of redacted messages on LinkedIn. (Dkt. #121, Exh. D). Pursuant to the February 2015 Discovery Ruling, on February 25, 2015, plaintiffs produced the unredacted versions of these eight pages.

After a careful review of these eight pages, the Magistrate Judge agrees that the redacted portions are all protected from disclosure, under either the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or by simply omitting a personal e-mail address.

This is not a Recommended Ruling, but a ruling on a non-dispositive motion, the standard of review of which is specified in 28 U.S.C. § 636; FED. R. CIV. P. 6(a), 6(e) & 72; and Rule 72.2 of the Local Rules for United States Magistrate Judges. As such, it is an order of the Court unless reversed or modified by the District Judge upon timely made objection.

See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b )(written objections to ruling must be filed within fourteen calendar days after service of same); FED. R. CIV. P. 6(a), 6(e) & 72; Rule 72.2 of the Local Rules for United States Magistrate Judges, United States District Court for the District of Connecticut; Small v. Secretary, H&HS, 892 F.2d. 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989)(failure to file timely objection to Magistrate Judge's recommended ruling may preclude further appeal to Second Circuit).

Dated at New Haven, Connecticut, this 26th day of February, 2015.

/s/ Joan G. Margolis, USMJ

Joan Glazer Margolis

United States Magistrate Judge