DUSHANE v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY MAIN JAIL, 2:15-cv-0136 TLN CKD P. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150708a00
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jul. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 07, 2015
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . On May 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed May 12, 2015, denying Plaintiff's "motion to extend prison copy work limit ..." 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
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . On May 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed May 12, 2015, denying Plaintiff's "motion to extend prison copy work limit ..." 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 t..
More
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
On May 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed May 12, 2015, denying Plaintiff's "motion to extend prison copy work limit ..." 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 May 12, 2015, is affirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
