Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Arnold v. Marceno, 2:18-cv-752-FtM-99MRM. (2018)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20181219b74 Visitors: 7
Filed: Dec. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2018
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on review of the parties' Case Management Report (Doc. 13) filed on November 29, 2018. The parties checked that they consent to proceed before a magistrate judge. In order for the parties to proceed in this manner, all parties must sign a Consent to Exercise of Jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge form, attached hereto, and agree that any appeal shall be taken to the United States Court of App
More

ORDER1

This matter comes before the Court on review of the parties' Case Management Report (Doc. 13) filed on November 29, 2018. The parties checked that they consent to proceed before a magistrate judge. In order for the parties to proceed in this manner, all parties must sign a Consent to Exercise of Jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge form, attached hereto, and agree that any appeal shall be taken to the United States Court of Appeals. If all parties desire to consent, this form must be filed with the Clerk of Court. Absent a written consent, the case will be placed on the District Judge's trial calendar.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

If all parties desire to proceed before the magistrate judge, the consent to magistrate judge form attached hereto must be filed on or before December 28, 2018.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
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