Johnson v. Bilic, 18-cv-04773-VKD. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190124995
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jan. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE Re: Dkt. No. 20 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI , Magistrate Judge . On January 22, 2019, plaintiff Scott Johnson and defendants Ante Bilic and Fernando Vasquez filed a proposed consent decree resolving Mr. Johnson's claims with respect to injunctive relief. Dkt. No. 20. Although Mr. Johnson has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction, Dkt. No. 7, defendants have not yet indicated whether they consent or decline. The Court declines to enter
Summary: ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE Re: Dkt. No. 20 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI , Magistrate Judge . On January 22, 2019, plaintiff Scott Johnson and defendants Ante Bilic and Fernando Vasquez filed a proposed consent decree resolving Mr. Johnson's claims with respect to injunctive relief. Dkt. No. 20. Although Mr. Johnson has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction, Dkt. No. 7, defendants have not yet indicated whether they consent or decline. The Court declines to enter t..
More
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE
Re: Dkt. No. 20
VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI, Magistrate Judge.
On January 22, 2019, plaintiff Scott Johnson and defendants Ante Bilic and Fernando Vasquez filed a proposed consent decree resolving Mr. Johnson's claims with respect to injunctive relief. Dkt. No. 20.
Although Mr. Johnson has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction, Dkt. No. 7, defendants have not yet indicated whether they consent or decline. The Court declines to enter the proposed consent decree as an order of judgment, and to retain jurisdiction to enforce it, in the absence of full consent of the parties to magistrate judge jurisdiction. The Court therefore denies the parties' proposed consent decree without prejudice to the parties resubmitting their proposed consent decree after defendants have indicated whether they consent to or decline magistrate judge jurisdiction. See Dkt. Nos. 11, 14, 15. Any resubmitted proposed consent decree should correct the error in the footer of Exhibit A to the proposed consent decree that lists an incorrect case number.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
