Linsky v. Astrue

Filing 7

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO INFORM COURT WHETHER THEY CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 10/26/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

DENISE E. LINSKY,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

Plaintiff,

No. C 12-05278 JSW

v.
MICHAEL C. ASTRUE, Commissioner of
Social Security,

13
Defendant.
14

/

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES
TO INFORM COURT WHETHER
THEY CONSENT TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL
PURPOSES

15
In cases initially assigned to a district judge, the parties may consent at any time to
16
reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including entry of final
17
judgment. See Civil L.R. 73-1(b). Accordingly, the parties are hereby DIRECTED to advise
18
the Court, no later than November 9, 2012, as to whether they consent to have a magistrate
19

judge conduct all further proceedings in the instant action.1 For the parties’ convenience,

20
consent forms are available at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov, in the “Forms” section. The
21
parties are further advised that they may jointly request assignment to a specific magistrate
22
judge.
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
Dated: October 26, 2012
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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