Dixon v. San Francisco Police Department et al
Filing
4
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE CONSENT/DECLINATION. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 10/31/2011. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2011)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
Northern District of California
5
6
HOWARD DIXON
No. C 11-05217 MEJ
Plaintiff(s),
7
v.
8
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO
FILE CONSENT/DECLINATION
FORM
SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT
9
10
Defendant(s).
_____________________________________/
12
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application. Upon review of the
13
record in this action, the Court notes that Plaintiff has not filed a written consent to magistrate judge
14
jurisdiction. This civil case was randomly assigned to the undersigned magistrate judge for all
15
purposes including trial. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the magistrate judges of this district
16
court are designated to conduct any and all proceedings in a civil case, including trial and entry of
17
final judgment, upon the consent of the parties. An appeal from a judgment entered by a magistrate
18
judge may be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the same
19
manner as an appeal from any other judgment of a district court.
20
You have the right to have your case assigned to a United States District Judge for trial and
21
disposition. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall inform the Court, by way of the enclosed form, whether he
22
consents to magistrate judge jurisdiction or requests reassignment to a United States District Judge
23
for trial. The consent/declination form shall be filed by November 15, 2011.
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 31, 2011
_______________________________
Maria-Elena James
Chief United States Magistrate Judge
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
Plaintiff(s),
5
6
7
8
No. C 11-05217 MEJ
HOWARD DIXON
vs.
SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendant(s).
/
9
10
CONSENT TO PROCEED BEFORE A UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
11
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the undersigned party hereby
12
consents to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in this
13
case, including trial, and order the entry of final judgment, and voluntarily waives the right to
14
proceed before a United States District Judge.
15
16
Dated:_________________________
Signed by:____________________________
17
Counsel for:__________________________
18
19
REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT TO A UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
20
The undersigned party hereby declines to consent to the assignment of this case to a United
21
States Magistrate Judge for trial and disposition, and hereby requests the reassignment of this case to
22
a United States District Judge.
23
24
Dated:___________________________
Signed by:____________________________
25
Counsel for:__________________________
26
27
28
2
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE
3
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
6
HOWARD DIXON
7
8
9
10
Case Number: 11-05217 MEJ
Plaintiff,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
v.
SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendant.
/
12
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
13
14
15
16
17
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on October 31, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said
envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle
located in the Clerk's office.
Howard Dixon
2363 Grande Vista Place
Oakland, CA 94621
18
19
20
Dated: October 31, 2011
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Brenda Tolbert, Deputy Clerk
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?