Cox Communications, Inc. v. MarkMonitor, Inc., 19-mc-80050-SK (HSG). (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190424930
Visitors: 13
Filed: Apr. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF Re: Dkt. No. 15 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Pending before the Court is MarkMonitor, Inc.'s motion for relief from a non-dispositive pretrial order issued by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on March 7, 2019 granting Cox Communications, Inc.'s motion to compel. See Dkt. No. 15. A pretrial order by a magistrate judge will be reversed only if it "is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). The Court has carefully reviewed J
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF Re: Dkt. No. 15 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Pending before the Court is MarkMonitor, Inc.'s motion for relief from a non-dispositive pretrial order issued by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on March 7, 2019 granting Cox Communications, Inc.'s motion to compel. See Dkt. No. 15. A pretrial order by a magistrate judge will be reversed only if it "is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). The Court has carefully reviewed Ju..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF
Re: Dkt. No. 15
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., District Judge.
Pending before the Court is MarkMonitor, Inc.'s motion for relief from a non-dispositive pretrial order issued by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on March 7, 2019 granting Cox Communications, Inc.'s motion to compel. See Dkt. No. 15.
A pretrial order by a magistrate judge will be reversed only if it "is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). The Court has carefully reviewed Judge Kim's order, MarkMonitor's motion, and the relevant legal authorities. Judge Kim's order is well-reasoned and thorough. The Court affirms the non-dispositive order because it is not "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." See Grimes v. City & Cty. of San Francisco, 951 F.2d 236, 240 (9th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, the Court DENIES MarkMonitor's motion for relief from Judge Kim's non-dispositive pretrial order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
