Opinion
3:11-cv-00010-LRH-VPC
04-11-2013
ROBERT BLUE, Plaintiff, v. HOWARD SKOLIK, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiff's Objection to Magistrate Judge Order Denying Plaintiff Motion for Order Directing Defendant to Respond to Interrogatories and/or Extend Discovery (Doc #93 filed 01/01/15/13) (#98), which the court will treat as a motion to reconsider Magistrate's Order #93. Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff's Objection to Magistrate Judge's Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Order Directing Defendant to Respond to Interrogatories and/or Extend Discovery (#103) on February 5, 2013.
Refers to this court's docket number.
The Court has conducted its review in this case, has fully considered the Plaintiff's motion, Defendants' response, and other relevant matters of record pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b) (1), and concludes that the Magistrate Judge's ruling was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.
The Magistrate Judge's Order (#93) will, therefore, be sustained and Plaintiff's motion (#98) is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE