Henry v. State of Alaska Department of Revenue Child Support Services Division et al

Filing 38

ORDER 1) DENYING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO WITHDRAW CONSENT TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND 2) DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES IS A PROPER DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION (Dkt. Nos. 26, 35). Signed by magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 4/5/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 12 RONALD HENRY, Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 15 16 17 STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al., Case No.: C 11-03255 JSC ORDER 1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW CONSENT TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND 2) DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES IS A PROPER DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION (Dkt. Nos. 26, 35) Defendants. 18 19 Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw consent to a magistrate 20 21 judge and re-assign this case “to a District Court Article III judge for the remainder of the 22 proceedings.” (Dkt. No. 26 at 6.) The Court is also in receipt of a communication from 23 Plaintiff requesting 1) a “re-visitation of the Court’s contention that it has no jurisdiction over 24 the Alaska defendant”; 2) “a written order to support the retention of the jurisdiction of a 25 magistrate judge”; and 3) “a written order clarifying [the Court’s] contention that it dismissed 26 the United States Department of Health and Human Services . . . as defendant.” (Dkt. No. 35 27 at 2.) 28 First, as stated at the February 2, 2012 case management conference, the Court declines 1 2 to reconsider the dismissal of Alaska as a defendant. (See Dkt. No. 25.) Second, Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge 3 4 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Dkt. No. 6.) The Court notes Plaintiff’s objection to this 5 Court’s continued jurisdiction; however, “[t]here is no absolute right, in a civil case, to 6 withdraw consent to trial and other proceedings before a magistrate judge.” Dixon v. Ylst, 990 7 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993). In fact, only a court can authorize such a withdrawal and only 8 “for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary circumstances shown by the 9 party.” Id. (referencing 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(6); Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b); Fellman v. Fireman’s Northern District of California Fund Ins. Co., 735 F.2d 55, 58 (2d Cir. 1984)). Plaintiff has not shown “extraordinary 11 United States District Court 10 circumstances” that would support transfer of this case to a district court judge, and this Court 12 retains jurisdiction. Third, Plaintiff alleges that though he agreed to dismiss the United States Department 13 14 of State as a defendant, this Court dismissed the Department of Health and Human Services 15 (“DHHS”) improperly since he did not intend to agree to dismiss DHHS. (Dkt. No. 35 at 7; 16 Dkt. No. 25 at 6.) The Court previously found that Plaintiff did not have standing to bring his 17 claim against the federal government for theoretically denying him access to a passport since 18 he had not actually applied for a passport. (Dkt. No. 25 at 2.) It is unclear if Plaintiff alleges 19 any other specific harms suffered as a result of the federal government in general or DHHS in 20 particular. The Court orders Plaintiff to show cause as to why the Department of Health and 21 Human Services is a proper defendant in this case by filing, on or before April 20, 2012, 22 clarification as to the particular conduct of DHHS he challenges and the harm, if any, he 23 suffered as a result. As noted at the February 2, 2012 case management conference, Defendant shall file a 24 25 Motion to Dismiss by April 6, 2012, Plaintiff shall file any opposition by April 20, 2012, 26 Defendant shall file any reply by April 27, 2012, and a hearing will commence on May 3, 27 2012 at 9:00 am. 28 // 2 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 Dated: April 5, 2012 _________________________________ JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?