Howard v. Wang, et al.

Filing 85

ORDER REASSIGNING ACTION to United States Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/12/14. The new case number is 1:10-cv-01783-DLB.(Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 TIMOTHY HOWARD, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 vs. J. WANG, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:10-cv-01783 AWI DLB PC ORDER ASSIGNING ACTION TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DENNIS L. BECK (Documents 49 and 84) 17 18 19 Plaintiff Timothy Howard (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action is proceeding on 21 Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against Defendant Edgar Clark. 22 In light of the fact that all parties to this action have voluntarily consented to have a 23 United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in the case, including the 24 trial and entry of a final judgment, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 25 26 27 1. This action is assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck for all purposes within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to conduct any and all further proceedings in the case, including the trial and entry of final judgment, 28 1 1 2 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign this action in its entirety to Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck, and 3 3. The new case number shall be 1:10-cv-01783 DLB PC.1 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 12, 2014 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 Although the Court will issue an Amended Second Scheduling Order, the Telephonic Trial Confirmation Hearing and trial date will remain the same. 2

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?