Jansen v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al

Filing 11

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/18/13 ORDERING that due to plaintiffs consent to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for all purposes, the Clerk of Court is directed to rescind the assignment of this case to a district judge. The findings and recommendations filed April 17, 2013, are construed as an order. This action is dismissed without prejudice.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

MICHAEL E. JANSEN,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. 2:13-0698-KJN-P

vs.

14

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION,
et al.,

15

Defendants.

ORDER
/

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking

18

relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 17, 2013, upon screening the complaint, the

19

undersigned filed findings and recommendations, recommending dismissal of this action because

20

duplicative of another action pending in this court. (ECF No. 9.) The findings and

21

recommendations were served on plaintiff, and contained notice that any objections were to be

22

filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed no objections. Moreover, on April 19, 2013, plaintiff

23

consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for all purposes.1

24
1

25
26

This matter was initially and routinely referred to a United States Magistrate Judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local Rule 302. Plaintiff thereafter consented to the
jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for all purposes. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); Local Rule
305(a). (See ECF No. 10.)
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Due to plaintiff’s consent to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate

3

judge for all purposes, the Clerk of Court is directed to rescind the assignment of this case to a

4

district judge.

5
6

2. The findings and recommendations filed April 17, 2013, are construed as an
order.

7
8

3. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
DATED: June 18, 2013

9
10

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12

/jans0698.800

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