Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-03592/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-03592-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

INTAGIO CORPORATION,

Plaintiff, No. C 06-3592 PJH

v. ORDER RE OBJECTIONS

TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS, INC., RULING RE SANCTIONS

Defendant.

_______________________________/

The court is in receipt of defendant’s objections to Magistrate Judge Chen’s

discovery order dated September 20, 2007. Specifically, defendant objects to the

Magistrate Judge’s decision to award sanctions against defendant in the amount of $4200,

in view of defendant’s failure to provide complete interrogatory responses. 

Defendant’s objections are hereby OVERRULED. First, defendant’s objections are

untimely. Defendant filed the instant objections on October 8, 2007 – well more than 10

days after the Magistrate Judge’s September 20 ruling issued. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc.

72(a)(requiring service of objections “[w]ithin 10 days after being served with a copy of the

magistrate judge’s order”). Second, and moreover, after review of the Magistrate Judge’s

ruling as well as the relevant underlying supporting authority, the court concludes that the

Magistrate Judge’s ruling is neither clearly erroneous, nor contrary to law, as contemplated

by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72-(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 11, 2007 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-03592-PJH Document 170 Filed 10/11/07 Page 1 of 1