Melancon v. Astrue

Filing 8

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO INFORM COURT WHETHER HE CONSENTS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES. Defendant is directed to advise the Court, no later than December 2, 2011, whether he consents to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in the instant action. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on November 16, 2011. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11

DEBRA A. MELANCON,

No. C-11-5225 MMC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO
INFORM COURT WHETHER HE
CONSENTS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE
FOR ALL PURPOSES

v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

12

Defendant.

/

13
14

In cases initially assigned to a district judge, the parties may consent at any time to

15

reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including entry of final

16

judgment. See Civil L.R. 73-1(b). On October 28, 2011, plaintiff Debra A. Melancon

17

voluntarily consented to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further

18

proceedings in the case, including trial, and order entry of a final judgment. Accordingly,

19

defendant Michael J. Astrue is hereby DIRECTED to advise the Court, no later than

20

December 2, 2011, as to whether he consents to have a magistrate judge conduct all

21

further proceedings in the instant action.1

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 16, 2011
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28

1

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.