Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01873/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01873-14/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

L. QIYAM POGUE, et al., No. 2:05-cv-01873-MCE-GGH P

Plaintiffs, 

vs. ORDER

JEANNE WOODFORD, Director of

the California Department of Corrections,

et al., 

Defendants.

 /

On April 14, 2008 (or on April 8, 2008, by application of the mailbox rule), plaintiff filed

what he entitled Objections to the Findings and Recommendations, filed on March 21, 2008. 

However, the Findings and Recommendations, recommended denial of defendants’ motion to

dismiss, which inured to plaintiff’s benefit, and a review of plaintiff’s “objections” reveal that

they should be construed as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s Order portion

of the Order and Findings and Recommendations, filed on March 21, 2008, which so construed,

the court in this instance will also liberally construe as timely filed. The Order, inter alia, granted

some portions of plaintiff’s motions to compel discovery, modifying some discovery requests,

and denied some requests as overbroad..

Case 2:05-cv-01873-MCE -GGH Document 106 Filed 04/22/08 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

 The court notes, however, that plaintiff is correct that at page 10, line 17 of the Order, 1

defendant Tilton was misidentified as defendant Pogue, an evident typographical error. 

2

Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 72-303(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

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

magistrate judge filed March 21, 2008, is affirmed. 

Dated: April 22, 2008

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-01873-MCE -GGH Document 106 Filed 04/22/08 Page 2 of 2