United States District Court, D. New Jersey
July 6, 2005.
WILLIAM SEYMOUR JONES, Plaintiff,
ZARA, ET AL., Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: FAITH HOCHBERG, District Judge
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff William Seymour Jones appeals the May 6, 2005 Order
of Magistrate Judge Shwartz (1) granting Plaintiff's request for
additional time to respond to discovery demands; (2) denying
Plaintiff's request to compel Mr. Dermody to provide documents;
and (3) denying Plaintiff's request to reconsider an April 27,
2005 decision denying Plaintiff's request to order Defendants to
pay for and produce a copy of Plaintiff's deposition. Plaintiff
appeals the portion of Magistrate Judge Shwartz's ruling that
denies his requests for additional time and to compel Mr. Dermody
to provide documents.
This Court having reviewed Magistrate Judge Shwartz's Orders,
dated April 27, 2005 and May 6, 2005, and the submission of
it appearing that, in denying Plaintiff's discovery requests,
Magistrate Judge Shwartz carefully considered Plaintiff's
numerous repetitive submissions, and
it appearing that Magistrate Judge Shwartz further determined
that Defendants had diligently responded to Plaintiff's requests
for discovery, and it appearing that Magistrate Judge Shwartz further found that
Plaintiff's discovery demands were moot, and
it appearing that the Order is neither clearly erroneous nor
contrary to law.*fn1
IT IS on this 6th day of July, 2005,
ORDERED that the May 6, 2005 decision by Magistrate Judge
Shwartz, denying Plaintiff's discovery demands is AFFIRMED.