Opinion
ORDER RE DEFENDANTS' OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE'S ORDER DENYING THEIR MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES
MARTIN J. JENKINS, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendants' Objections to Magistrate Judge's Order Denying Their Motion for Attorney's Fees pursuant to Rule 72(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. No. 37.) Specifically, Defendants object to Magistrate Judge Maria Elena James' Order Denying Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees, which was filed on ECF on December 4, 2006. ( See Hirsh Decl. Exh. 1.) Defendants filed their objections on December 21, 2006. Thus defendant's objections were not timely. Fed.R.Civ.Pr-Oc-72.
Rule 72(a) states:
Within 10 days after being served with a copy of the magistrate judge's order, a party may serve and file objections to the order; a party may not thereafter assign as error a defect in the magistrate judge's order to which objection was not timely made.
Pursuant to Local Rule 5-6 and General Order 45, in a case designated for electronic filing, a document is served on the date that it is filed on ECF. Here, Judge James' Order was filed on ECF, and therefore served on Defendants on December 4, 2006. Defendants did not file their objections until December Absent any justification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure No. 6 for failing to timely file, the Court declines to disturb the Magistrate Judge's Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.