Hard Drive Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-84

Filing 20

ORDER. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 10/18/2011. (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2011)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

HARD DRIVE PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

8
9

v.

ORDER

DOES 1-84,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C 11-3648 PJH

Defendants.
_______________________________/

12
13

The instant action was recently reassigned to the undersigned judge, following the

14

filing of defendant “alleged Doe 68.105.97.108"’s notice of “non-consent” to the underlying

15

magistrate judge’s jurisdiction. The court is also in receipt of plaintiff’s objection to the

16

reassignment. The court has reviewed plaintiff’s objection and agrees with plaintiff that,

17

since defendant is a Doe defendant whose identity is unknown and who has yet to be

18

served with process in the underlying action, defendant’s standing to decline the magistrate

19

judge’s jurisdiction is unclear. Reassignment to the undersigned is therefore improper, until

20

defendant Doe’s identity has been determined, and service of process has been either

21

made upon the identified Doe defendant, or waived by the same.

22

The clerk is therefore directed to reassign the matter back to the magistrate judge

23

originally assigned to this action.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

Dated: October 18, 2011

26
27
28

______________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge