Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_03-cv-00566/USCOURTS-alsd-1_03-cv-00566-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JESSIE FISHER, et al., )

 )

Plaintiffs, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION 03-0566-WS-B

 )

CIBA SPECIALTY CHEMICALS CORP., )

et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Statement of Objection to Magistrate’s Order

on Privileged Documents (doc. 221).

A district court may disturb a magistrate judge’s final ruling on a nondispositive pretrial motion

only if the appellant shows it to be “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A);

see also Local Rule 72.3(e) (“The district court shall modify, set aside, or remand to the magistrate

judge any nondispositive order or portion thereof found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to

law.”); In re Commissioner's Subpoenas, 325 F.3d 1287, 1292 n.2 (11th Cir. 2003) (“The district

court correctly observed that the standard of review by which it reconsidered the magistrate judge's

determination of the instant pretrial matter is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.”). After careful

review of defendants’ Statement of Objection and supporting Memorandum (doc. 222) and all other

portions of the file deemed relevant, the Court finds that appellants/defendants have failed to

demonstrate that the Order entered by Magistrate Judge Bivins on July 25, 2005 is clearly erroneous or

contrary to law. The July 25 Order is affirmed and appellants’ Objection is overruled.

DONE and ORDERED this 16th day of August, 2005.

s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-00566-WS-B Document 233 Filed 08/16/05 Page 1 of 1