Howard v. People of the State of California

Filing 11

Order by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas denying 9 Motion to Withdraw Consent. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

EUREKA DIVISON

7
8

DANIEL LLOYD HOWARD,

Case No. 16-cv-4759-NJV (PR)

Petitioner,
9

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
WITHDRAW CONSENT

v.
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA,

Dkt. No. 9

Respondent.

13
14

Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se motion for a stay with respect to a writ of

15

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Docket No. 1. Petitioner consented to the

16

jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge. Docket No. 5. The court dismissed the motion to stay without

17

prejudice to allow petitioner to present additional arguments. The court informed petitioner that

18

he must file an underlying federal habeas petition setting forth any exhausted claims he wishes to

19

present and the unexhausted claims that he seeks to exhaust.

20

Petitioner has not submitted any additional filings but has filed a motion to withdraw his

21

consent to a Magistrate Judge. There is no absolute right in a civil case to withdraw consent to

22

trial and other proceedings before a magistrate judge. See Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th

23

Cir. 1993). Once a civil case is referred to a magistrate judge under § 636(c)), the reference can be

24

withdrawn by the court only for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary

25

circumstances shown by any party. See id. (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(6)). Petitioner has not

26

shown good cause or extraordinary circumstances. He only argues that he needs additional time to

27

prepare his filings.

28

Petitioner’s motion to withdraw consent (Docket No. 9) is DENIED, and he will be

1

provided an extension of time. The additional filings must be filed within fifty-six (56) days of

2

the date this order is filed. Failure to amend within the designated time will result in the dismissal

3

of this action.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 16, 2016
________________________
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2