Aitken v. Astrue

Filing 6

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO INFORM COURT WHETHER THEY CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES. The parties are directed to advise the Court, no later than February 6, 2009, as to whether they consent to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in the instant action. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on January 22, 2009. (Attachment: # 1 Consent Form) (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Normally, the Court would direct the parties to so inform the Court in their Joint Case Management Statement filed in connection with a case management conference. Because the instant action involves a review of an administrative record, however, a case management conference has not been scheduled.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAROLINA AITKEN, v. Plaintiff,

No. C-08-5716 MMC ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO INFORM COURT WHETHER THEY CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES /

United States District Court

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Defendant

In cases initially assigned to a district judge, the parties may consent at any time to reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including entry of final judgment. See Civil L.R. 73-1(b). Accordingly, the parties are hereby DIRECTED to advise the Court, no later than February 6, 2009, as to whether they consent to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in the instant action.1 For the parties' convenience, a consent form is attached hereto; forms are also available at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov, in the "Forms" section. The parties are further advised that they may jointly request assignment to a specific magistrate judge. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 22, 2009 MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge