Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Espinosa v. Saul, 19-cv-04633-JD. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190906773 Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO INFORM COURT WHETHER HE CONSENTS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES JAMES DONATO , District Judge . In cases assigned to a district judge, the parties may consent at any time to reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including entry of final judgment. See Civil L.R. 73-1(b). This option is being made available because the magistrate judges in this district have smaller civil dockets and no felony criminal cases and may be able to ad
More

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO INFORM COURT WHETHER HE CONSENTS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES

In cases assigned to a district judge, the parties may consent at any time to reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including entry of final judgment. See Civil L.R. 73-1(b). This option is being made available because the magistrate judges in this district have smaller civil dockets and no felony criminal cases and may be able to adjudicate this case more expeditiously than the undersigned district judge.

Accordingly, plaintiff is hereby directed to advise the court, no later than September 19, 2019, whether he consents to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in the instant action. Normally the parties would be directed to so inform the court in their Joint Case Management Statement filed in connection with the initial case management conference. However, because this case involves a review of an administrative record, a case management conference has not been scheduled. The parties are advised that they may jointly request assignment to a specific magistrate judge. For the parties' convenience, a consent form is attached hereto; forms are also available at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov, in the "Forms" section.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESUS ESPINOSA, Case No. 19-cv-04633-JD Plaintiff, v. CONSENT OR DECLINATION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION ANDREW SAUL, Defendant.

INSTRUCTIONS: Please indicate below by checking one of the two boxes whether you (if you are the party) or the party you represent (if you are an attorney in the case) choose(s) to consent or decline magistrate judge jurisdiction in this matter. Sign this form below your selection.

( ) Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), I voluntarily consent to have a United States magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment. I understand that appeal from the judgment shall be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

OR

( ) Decline Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), I decline to have a United States magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in this case.

DATE: ____________, 20____ NAME: ________________________________ COUNSEL FOR (OR "PRO SE"):________________________ _______________________ Signature
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer