United States District Court, D. New Jersey
June 10, 2005.
RONALD GEORGE BAILEY-EL, Plaintiff,
JOHN ASHCROFT, et al., Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: JEROME SIMANDLE, District Judge
This matter having come before the Court upon Plaintiff pro
se Ronald George Bailey-El's appeal from Magistrate Judge Ann
Marie Donio's Order of January 28, 2005, denying Plaintiff's
motion to appoint counsel; and the Court having read the parties'
submissions; and for good cause shown;
THE COURT FINDS as follows:
1. On January 28, 2005, Magistrate Judge Ann Marie
Donio issued an Order, denying Plaintiff's motion for
the appointment of counsel.
2. In her Order of January 28, 2005, Magistrate Judge
Donio considered Plaintiff's request for counsel in
light of the considerations set forth to guide that
inquiry in Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147 (3d Cir.
1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1196 (1994), and
ultimately determined that the analysis weighed in
favor of the denial of appointing counsel in this
matter. 3. This Court reviews the order of a magistrate judge
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). "A district judge
may only set aside an order of a magistrate
concerning a nondispositive matter where the order
has been shown to be clearly erroneous or contrary to
law." Snow Machines, Inc. v. Hedco, Inc.,
838 F.2d 718, 727-28 (3d Cir. 1988).
4. This Court now finds that nothing in Magistrate
Judge Donio's Order of January 28, 2005 can fairly be
said to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Thus, this Court will affirm that Order at this time.
IT IS this 10th day of June, 2005 hereby
ORDERED that the denial of appointment of counsel order by
Magistrate Judge Ann Marie Donio of January 28, 2005 be, and
hereby is, AFFIRMED.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.