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
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?