Kimbro v. Miranda

Full title: RICHARD KIMBRO, Plaintiff, v. MIRANDA, et al., Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Nov 10, 2015

2:12-cv-2154 MCE KJN P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 10, 2015)

Opinion

RICHARD KIMBRO, Plaintiff, v. MIRANDA, et al., Defendant. No. 2:12-cv-2154 MCE KJN P United States District Court, E.D. California. November 10, 2015

          ORDER

          MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

         On October 13, 2015, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed September 17, 2015 finding that a settlement conference would not be scheduled in this action.¹ ECF No. 128. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Id . Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge's ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

1 Plaintiff's request for reconsideration does not contain a proof of service. However, plaintiff signed his motion on September 27, 2015. Giving plaintiff the benefit of the doubt, the undersigned finds that plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is timely filed pursuant to the mailbox rule.

         Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed September 17, 2015 (ECF No. 124) is AFFIRMED.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.