Hara, et al. v. Transnation Title Insurance Company, et al.

Filing 4

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT AND ORDER that the Dft Home Equity USA, Inc. shall file on or before December 22, 2006 its written election to either consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction or elect to proceed before a United States District Judge. FURTHER ORD ERED that if Dft Home Equity USA, Inc. has not already done so, Dft Home Equity USA, Inc. shall serve upon the Plas and Dfts Transnation Title Insurance Company and Wachovia Mortgage Corporation theappropriate consent form provided at the time of the filing of its Notice of Removal at the time of service of its Notice of Removal upon the Plas and Dfts Transnation Title Insurance Company and Wachovia Mortgage Corporation. FURTHER ORDERED that Plas Bruce T. Hara and Edith H. Hara and Dfts Transnat ion Title Insurance Company and Wachovia Mortgage Corporation shall either consent to proceed before a magistrate judge or elect to proceed before a districtjudge by December 22, 2006. FURTHER ORDERED that counsel and any party, if unrepresented, shall hereinafter comply with the Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, as amended on December 1, 2006. Signed by Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 12/7/06. (KMG)

Download PDF
Hara, et al. v. Transnation Title Insurance Company, et al. Doc. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Bruce T. Hara and Edith H. Hara, husband) ) and wife, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) Transnation Title Insurance Company, an) Arizona corporation; Home Equity USA,) Inc., a Rhode Island corporation registered) as a foreign corporation in Arizona;) Wachovia Mortgage Corporation, a) Delaware corporation registered as a) foreign corporation in Arizona, John Does) 1-5; Jane Does 1-5; ABC Corporations I-V) ) and XYZ Partnerships I-V, ) ) Defendants. ) No. CV-06-2903-PHX-LOA NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT AND ORDER Pursuant to Local Rule 3.8(a), LRCiv, Rules of Practice, effective December 1, 2006, all civil cases are, and will be, randomly assigned to a U.S. district judge or to a U.S. magistrate judge. This matter has been assigned to the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge. As a result of the aforesaid Order and Rule, if all parties consent in writing, the case will remain with the assigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(1) for all purposes, including trial and final entry of judgment. If any party chooses the district judge option, the case will be randomly reassigned to a U.S. district judge. To either consent to the assigned magistrate judge or to elect to have the case heard before a district judge, the appropriate section of the form, entitled Consent To Exercise Of Jurisdiction By United Case 2:06-cv-02903-SRB Document 4 Filed 12/07/2006 Page 1 of 3 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 States Magistrate Judge1, must be completed, signed and filed. The party filing the case or removing it to this Court is responsible for serving all parties with the consent forms. Each party must file a completed consent form and certificate of service with the Clerk of the Court not later than 20 days after entry of appearance, and must serve a copy by mail or hand delivery upon all parties of record in the case. Any party is free to withhold consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction without adverse consequences. 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(2); Rule 73(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Anderson v. Woodcreek Venture Ltd., 351 F.3d 911, 913-14 (9th Cir. 2003) (pointing out that consent is the "touchstone of magistrate [judge] jurisdiction" under 28 U.S.C. 636(c). A review of the Court's file indicates that Defendant Home Equity USA, Inc. has filed a Notice of Removal on December 1, 2006. Defendant Home Equity USA, Inc. shall have until December 22, 2006, within which to make its selection to either consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction or elect to proceed before a U. S. district judge. It is unknown if a copy of the appropriate consent form, electronically provided to counsel for appearing Defendant Home Equity USA, Inc. by the Clerk at the time the Notice of Removal was filed, was served with the Notice of Removal per the written instructions from the Clerk. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant Home Equity USA, Inc. shall file on or before December 22, 2006 its written election to either consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction or elect to proceed before a United States district judge. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Defendant Home Equity USA, Inc. has not already done so, Defendant Home Equity USA, Inc. shall serve upon the Plaintiffs and The consent/election form may be obtained directly from the Clerk of the Court or by accessing the District of Arizona's web site at www.azd.uscourts.gov. To find the consent/election form on the District's web site, click on "Local Rules" at the top of the page, then click on "forms" on the left side of the page and then click on and print the appropriate form. -2Case 2:06-cv-02903-SRB Document 4 Filed 12/07/2006 Page 2 of 3 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants Transnation Title Insurance Company and Wachovia Mortgage Corporation the appropriate consent form provided at the time of the filing of its Notice of Removal at the time of service of its Notice of Removal upon the Plaintiffs and Defendants Transnation Title Insurance Company and Wachovia Mortgage Corporation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Bruce T. Hara and Edith H. Hara and Defendants Transnation Title Insurance Company and Wachovia Mortgage Corporation shall either consent to proceed before a magistrate judge or elect to proceed before a district judge by December 22, 2006. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel and any party, if unrepresented, shall hereinafter comply with the Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, as amended on December 1, 2006. The District's Rules of Practice may be found on the District Court's internet web page at www.azd.uscourts.gov/. All other rules may be found as www.uscourts.gov/rules/. The fact that a party is acting pro se does not discharge this party's duties to "abide by the rules of the court in which he litigates." Carter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 784 F.2d 1006, 1008 (9th Cir. 1986). DATED this 7th day of December, 2006. -3Case 2:06-cv-02903-SRB Document 4 Filed 12/07/2006 Page 3 of 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?