Opinion
05 Civ. 8115 (KMW) (MHD).
August 2, 2007
OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff Dana Gibson objects to a June 14, 2007 order by Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger (the "Order"), denying Plaintiff's requests for an extension of time to respond to Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment, and to reopen discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f). See Plaintiff's Objections at 3-9 (Dkt. No. 31).
A court can modify or set aside a magistrate judge's order dealing with nondispositive matters, such as these, only if it is "found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a); accord 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) (2005). Moreover, reversal of a magistrate judge's order resolving discovery disputes is appropriate only if there is an abuse of discretion.See Mathias v. Jacobs, 167 F. Supp. 2d 606, 622-23 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
Magistrate Judge Dolinger properly denied Plaintiff's requests. With respect to Plaintiff's request for an extension of time, Magistrate Judge Dolinger found that Plaintiff has failed to put forth credible evidence demonstrating his need for additional time to respond to Defendants' motion. See Order at 2 (Dkt. No. 30). As for Plaintiff's request to reopen discovery, the Order noted that the request is untimely, and that Plaintiff nevertheless failed to submit the required affidavits under Rule 56(f) to permit additional discovery. See id. These findings are neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.
Accordingly, the Court upholds the Order, and denies Plaintiff's requests for an extension of time and to reopen discovery.
SO ORDERED.