The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jeffrey L. VIKEN Chief Judge
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER FOR CONSOLIDATION OF CASES AND OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS
On April 24,2012, plaintiff Chelsea Linton moved, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(2), to consolidate Linton v. Angie's Inc., et al, CIV. 09-5099, with Heil v. Belle Starr Saloon & Casino, Inc., et al., CIV. No. 09-5074. (CIV. 09-5099, Docket 63). Plaintiff Misty Heil did not oppose the consolidation. Id. Thomas W. Sherwood, Sr., d/b/a Sherwood Investment & Trust Company ("SITC") was the only defendant who opposed the motion.
Id. at Docket 73. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 the court referred plaintiff Linton's motion to Magistrate Judge Veronica L. Duffy. Id. at Docket 75. On June 26, 2012, Magistrate Judge Duffy issued an order granting the motion to consolidate. Id. at Docket 78; see also Civ. 09-5074, Docket 120. The order required all further filings be made in Heil, as the earlier and lead case. Id. at p. 17. SITC filed objections to the magistrate judge's order. (09-5074, Docket 130).*fn1 Plaintiff Linton filed a response to SITC's objections. Id. at Docket 132.*fn2
For the reasons stated below, the court finds Magistrate Judge Duffy's order is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law*fn3 and defendant's objections and request for reconsideration (Civ. 09-5074, Docket 130)*fn4 are denied.
SITC's objections to the magistrate judge's order granting Ms. Linton's ("plaintiff" for the remainder of this order) motion to consolidate are summarized as:
1. Plaintiff's motion to consolidate is untimely;
2. The overlap of witnesses is insufficient to warrant consolidation;
3. The damages witnesses and evidence are different;
4. Each case will require separate facts to establish liability;
5. The magistrate judge relied on non-precedential authority; and
6. Consolidation will be prejudicial to all defendants. Id. Each objection will be ...