Cagle #079874 v. Ryan et al

Filing 31

ORDER (Service Packet) - The objections are overruled and the 26 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted as follows; Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A, the following Counts of the 21 Second Amended Complaint are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PR EJUDICE: Counts 5-571, 572, 575-578, 580, 581, 584-593, 594-596, 597, 598, 602-607, 609-613, 619-704, 706-721, 722, 723-724, and 725. FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A, that the following Defendants are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDI CE: Charles Ryan, Deputy Warden Unknown Black, Bobo, Brower, Darius, DeLacerta, DeMarco, Durazo, Guilfoyle, Heet, Keefe, Koeppel, Silvas, Smith, Squires, Swanda, Thompson, Valazquez and Washburn. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the followin g Defendants are required to respond to the following Counts of the 21 Second Amended Complaint: Defendants Corizon (Counts 1, 614, 615, 616, 617 and 618), Nurse Unknown Black (Count 1), Mares (Count 2), Henry (Counts 3 and 4), Vick lund (Counts 3 and 4), Unknown Transportation Officers Black 1 and 2 (Count 573), Babich (Count 574), Salas (Count 579), Bishop (Count 582), Vargas (Count 583), Sharp (Count 599), Berrellez (Counts 600 and 601), Laux (Count 608) and Roman (70 5). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that service on Defendants Corizon, Mares, Babis, Salas, Bishop, Berrellez, Henry, Vicklund, Vargas, Sharp, Roman and Laux is hereby ordered. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff a service packet including a sum mons and request for waiver forms, a copy of this Order, and a copy of Marshal's Process Receipt & Return form (USM-285) for each Defendant. Plaintiff has ninety days from the date of this order to move to amend to identify the fictitiously na med defendants, Defendants Unknown Transportation Officers Black 1 and 2 and Unknown Nurse Black, or such defendants shall thereafter be dismissed without prejudice. FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff's unilateral 30 motion to reassig n this case to Magistrate Judge Metcalf is denied. However, the Clerk's office shall send a Consent to Exercise of Jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge form to Plaintiff and each Defendant, who may return them at their option. Sig ned by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 10/30/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Letter, # 2 Samples and Service Packet for Dft. 1, # 3 Service Packet for Dft. 2, # 4 Service Packet for Dft. 3, # 5 Service Packet for Dft. 4, # 6 Service Packet fo r Dft. 5, # 7 Service Packet for Dft. 6, # 8 Service Packet for Dft. 7, # 9 Service Packet for Dft. 8, # 10 Service Packet for Dft. 9, # 11 Service Packet for Dft. 10, # 12 Service Packet for Dft. 11, # 13 Service Packet for Dft. 12, # 14 Instructions, # 15 Consent Form)(ATD)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 2 3 4 5 Plaintiff, Case No. CV vs. 6 7 Defendant. 8 CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 In accordance with the provisions of Title 28, U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the undersigned (party)(counsel of 11 record for 12 voluntarily consents to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in the 13 ) in the above-captioned civil matter hereby case, including trial and entry of a final judgment, with direct review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals if an appeal is filed. 14 15 Date: Signature 16 Print Name 17 18 DISTRICT JUDGE OPTION 19 Pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C. § 636(c)(2) the undersigned (party)(counsel of record for 20 ) in the above captioned civil matter acknowledges the availability of a 21 United States Magistrate Judge but elects to have this case randomly assigned to a United States District Judge. 22 Date: Signature 23 24 25 26 27 Print Name CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Consent was served (by mail) (by hand delivery) on all parties of record in this case, this day of , 20 . 28 Signature **E-file this form using the event Consent/Election Form LRCiv 3.7(b) under Other Documents**

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?