Opinion
No. C-11-5310 EMC
03-04-2013
SYMANTEC CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. ACRONIS, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS'
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER OF
DECEMBER 28, 2012
(Docket No. 173)
Acronis has moved for relief from Judge Corley's order of December 28, 2012. Under federal law, "[a] non-dispositve order entered by a magistrate [judge] must be deferred to unless it is 'clearly erroneous or contrary to law.'" Grimes v. City & County of San Francisco, 951 F.2d 236, 241 (9th Cir. 1991). When a district court reviews a magistrate judge's order, it "may not simply substitute its judgment for that of the [magistrate judge]." Id. Because Acronis has failed to show that Judge Corley's order was clearly erroneous or that it was contrary to law, its motion for relief is hereby DENIED.
This order disposes of Docket No. 173.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge