*1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH SCOTT W. MARTIN and ROBYN LYNN MEMORANDUM DECISION AND MARTIN, ORDER OVERRULING DEFENDANT’S
OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE Plaintiffs, JUDGE’S RULING v.
CHRISTOPHER SCHROEDER, Case No. 2:16-CV-1285
Defendant. District Judge Jill N. Parrish On August 1, 2017, Defendant moved the Court to compel Plaintiffs’ criminal counsel in the underlying criminal prosecution to produce their files (ECF No. 25). Magistrate Judge Pead denied that motion in a ruling and order dated August 25, 2017 (ECF No. 27). Now before the Court is Defendant’s objection to that ruling and order (ECF No. 28).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a) requires the district judge in the case to “consider timely objections and modify or set aside any part of the order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.” The Court has considered the record, Judge Pead’s ruling and order, and Defendant’s objection. No part of Judge Pead’s order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Therefore, the Court will not alter or set aside any part of the order.
SO ORDERED October 17, 2017
BY THE COURT ______________________________ Jill N. Parrish United States District Court Judge 1