DOE v. CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO., 11-2561 (MJD/SER). (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Minnesota
Number: infdco20120906a80
Visitors: 12
Filed: Sep. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Sep. 05, 2012
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS, Chief District Judge. The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff John Doe's objections to Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau's June 7, 2012 Order granting in part and denying in party Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Complaint. This Court will reverse a magistrate judge's order on a nondispositive issue if it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(a). The Court has reviewed the submissions and
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS, Chief District Judge. The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff John Doe's objections to Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau's June 7, 2012 Order granting in part and denying in party Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Complaint. This Court will reverse a magistrate judge's order on a nondispositive issue if it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(a). The Court has reviewed the submissions and t..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL J. DAVIS, Chief District Judge.
The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff John Doe's objections to Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau's June 7, 2012 Order granting in part and denying in party Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Complaint.
This Court will reverse a magistrate judge's order on a nondispositive issue if it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(a). The Court has reviewed the submissions and the record in this case and concludes that Magistrate Judge Rau's June 7 Order is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Therefore, the June 7 Order is affirmed. The Court further notes that Magistrate Judge Rau allowed all requested factual amendments to the Complaint and that ERISA provides causes of action for interference with ERISA benefits and for misrepresentation by fiduciaries. See, e.g., 29 U.S.C. § 1140; Varity Corp. v. Howe, 516 U.S. 489, 505-07 (1996); Libel v. Adventure Lands of America, Inc., 482 F.3d 1028, 1034-35 (8th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly, based upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. United States Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau's June 7, 2012 Order [Docket No. 43] is AFFIRMED.
2. Plaintiff's objection to that order [Docket No. 46] is OVERRULED.
Source: Leagle
