Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

JOHNSON v. ROBINSON, 2:12-cv-02400 WBS DAD P. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20140317853 Visitors: 2
Filed: Mar. 14, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 14, 2014
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. On March 7, 2014, plaintiff filed a document styled, "Objections To Magistrate Judge's Findings/Order Dated Feb. 28, 2014 Denying Plaintiff's Request For The Appointment Of Counsel — Only." (ECF No. 29.) The court construes plaintiff's objections as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed March 3, 2014 (ECF No. 25). Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or con
More

ORDER

WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.

On March 7, 2014, plaintiff filed a document styled, "Objections To Magistrate Judge's Findings/Order Dated Feb. 28, 2014 Denying Plaintiff's Request For The Appointment Of Counsel — Only." (ECF No. 29.) The court construes plaintiff's objections as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed March 3, 2014 (ECF No. 25). 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.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed March 3, 2014, denying plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel, is affirmed.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer