Lawrence

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DISCOVERY RULING

In this action for violation of the Fair Housing Act, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), objecting to the magistrate judge’s ruling with respect to Plaintiffs’ motion to' compel further responses to interrogatories. Defendants filed a response, and Plaintiffs filed a reply. For the reasons which follow, Plaintiffs’ objections to the discovery ruling are sustained in part and overruled in part.

A district court’s review of a magistrate judge’s order on a non-dispositive motion is limited. Rulings on discovery motions, such as the present motion, are non-dis-positive. See 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(A); Civ. Loe. R. 72.1(b). A district judge may reconsider a magistrate judge’s ruling on a non-dispositive motion only “where it has been shown that the magistrate’s order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(A); Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 72(a).

In their complaint, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have operated an apartment complex in a discriminatory manner by discriminating against families with children.…