Brazier v. California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation et al

Filing 32

ORDER denying 30 Motion to withdraw consent signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 08/07/13. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANTHONY BRAZIER,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:12-cv-0883 CKD P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTION AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18
19

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983,

20

has consented to this court’s jurisdiction. (ECF No. 5.) Before the court is plaintiff’s motion to

21

withdraw his consent. (ECF No. 30.)

22

“The right to adjudication before an Article III judge is an important constitutional right.

23

However, this right, like other fundamental rights, can be waived” pursuant to the consent of the

24

parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). United States v. Neville, 985 F.2d 992, 999-1000 (9th Cir.

25

1993) (citations omitted). “Once a civil case is referred to a magistrate judge under section

26

636(c), the reference can be withdrawn by the court only for good cause shown on its own

27

motion, or under extraordinary circumstances shown by any party.” Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478,

28
1

1

479-80 (9th Cir. 1993) (citation omitted); 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). As plaintiff has not shown good

2

cause to withdraw his consent, it remains in effect.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT plaintiff’s motion to withdraw consent

4

(ECF No. 30) is denied.

5

Dated: August 7, 2013

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11

2 / braz0883.consent

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2