In re Lyft Inc. Securities Litigation
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 IN RE LYFT INC. SECURITIES Case No. 19-cv-02690-HSG
LITIGATION
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 168
12 On June 15, 2021, Plaintiff Rick Keiner filed a motion for relief from a discovery order by 13 Magistrate Laurel Beeler concerning documents relating to reports of sexual assaults. See Dkt. 14 Nos. 168 (“Mot.”), 163 (“Order”). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, a district judge may 15 set aside a magistrate judge’s non-dispositive pretrial order only if it is “clearly erroneous or 16 contrary to law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). “The magistrate’s 17 factual determinations are reviewed for clear error, and the magistrate’s legal conclusions are 18 reviewed to determine whether they are contrary to law.” Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 268 F.R.D. 19 344, 348 (N.D. Cal. 2010). “The Court can overturn the “magistrate’s factual determinations only 20 if the…