Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00189/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00189-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN A. MARTIN,

Plaintiff, No. 2:10-cv-0189 WBS DAD (PC)

vs.

A. MASURET, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On April 23, 2012, plaintiff filed a document styled as objections to the

magistrate judge’s April 4, 2012 order denying his motion, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d), to

postpone consideration of defendants’ pending motion for summary judgment.1

 The court

construes plaintiff’s objections as a request for reconsideration of that order. Pursuant to E.D.

Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous or

contrary to law.” 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.

/////

1

 Plaintiff’s objections are dated April 14, 2012, as is the certificate of service appended

thereto and are therefore timely under Local Rule 303. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266

(1988).

1

Case 2:10-cv-00189-WBS-DAD Document 44 Filed 05/04/12 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of

the magistrate judge filed April 4, 2012, is affirmed. 

DATED: May 3, 2012

/mart0189.850(2)

2

Case 2:10-cv-00189-WBS-DAD Document 44 Filed 05/04/12 Page 2 of 2