Estrada v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 24

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S DECLINATION. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 6, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/6/2016)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

LUIS ESTRADA,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 16-cv-00722-MMC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S
DECLINATION

v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13

Before the Court is plaintiff's "Consent or Declination to Magistrate Judge

14

Jurisdiction," in which plaintiff states he declines to have a magistrate judge conduct all

15

further proceedings in the above-titled action. The declination was filed July 1, 2016, one

16

day after the filing of defendants' consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction and the Court's

17

issuance of an order of reference to a magistrate judge for all further proceedings, which

18

order was based on both parties' having consented in writing to magistrate judge

19

jurisdiction. (See Pl.'s Consent, filed April 27, 2016; Defs.' Consent, filed June 30, 2016.)

20

Given the prior written consents and the absence of any showing by plaintiff of

21

"extraordinary circumstances" warranting an order vacating the Court's order of June 30,

22

2016, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(4), plaintiff's declination is hereby DENIED. See Dixon v.

23

Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 479-80 (9th Cir. 1993) (affirming order denying declination, where

24

plaintiff previously filed consent to magistrate judge for all purposes).

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

Dated: July 6, 2016
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge