Serrano v. Rawers et al
ORDER DENYING 40 Request to Withdraw Consent; ORDER ASSIGNING Case and Presiding Judge signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/24/2015. The New Case Number is 1:11-cv-00399-MJS(PC). (Sant Agata, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JESSIE L. SERRANO,
OLD CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00399-LJO-MJS (PC)
NEW CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00399-MJS (PC)
SCOTT RAWERS, et al.,
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO
WITHDRAW CONSENT (ECF No. 40)
ORDER ASSIGNING CASE AND PRESIDING
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against
Defendant Lucas on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim.
On April 14, 2011, Plaintiff consented to have a United States Magistrate Judge
conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). (ECF No. 4.) On July 16, 2014, Defendant declined to
proceed before a Magistrate Judge. On September 16, 2014, Defendant filed a motion
for summary judgment (ECF No. 34), and thereafter consented to Magistrate Judge
jurisdiction for all purposes (ECF No. 39).
On December 17, 2014, Plaintiff filed a notice stating that he declines to proceed
before a Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 40), which the Court construes as a motion to
withdraw his April 14, 2011 consent.
“A party to a federal civil case has, subject to some exceptions, a constitutional
right to proceed before an Article III judge.” Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 479 (9th Cir.
2003). This right can be waived, allowing parties to consent to have any and all further
proceedings conducted before a Magistrate Judge. Id. at 479-80. There is no absolute
right to withdraw consent to proceeding before a Magistrate Judge. Id. at 480. Instead, a
motion to withdraw consent may be granted only for good cause or a showing of
extraordinary circumstances. Id.; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(4).
Here, Plaintiff filed only the Court’s standard form requiring a party to consent to
or decline Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 40.) He provides no basis for seeking
to withdraw his consent. Accordingly, his request to withdraw his April 14, 2011 consent
to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction is HEREBY DENIED.
The parties having consented to have all further proceedings in this case,
including trial and entry of final judgment, conducted before a Magistrate Judge (ECF
Nos. 4 & 39), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled action is assigned to the
docket of Magistrate Judge MICHAEL J. SENG as Presiding Judge.
ALL FUTURE PLEADINGS SHALL BE
NUMBERED AS FOLLOWS:
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
February 24, 2015
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?