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)

Download PDF
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?