Campbell v. Obama et al

Filing 62

ORDER RE: CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on October 3, 2014 re #4 , #60 . (psglc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2014) (Additional attachment(s) added on 10/3/2014: #1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE) (ofr, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

KENNETH L. CAMPBELL,
Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14

BARACK OBAMA, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16
17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:14-cv-03071-PSG
ORDER RE: CONSENT TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
JURISDICTION
(Re: Docket Nos. 4 and 60)

The docket reflects Plaintiff Kenneth L. Campbell’s consent to magistrate jurisdiction
before the undersigned on July 14, 2014. 1 Campbell filed a declination to proceed before a
magistrate judge on September 29, 2014. 2 Campbell’s filing does not comport with the law of this

19
20

circuit.

21

Once a magistrate judge obtains consent under 8. U.S.C. Section 636(c), the consent “can

22

be withdrawn by the court only ‘for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary

23

circumstances shown’ by any party.” 3 “There is no absolute right, in a civil case, to withdraw

24
25
26

1

See Docket No. 4 at 1 (“In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), I voluntarily
consent to have a United States magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in this case,
including trial and entry of final judgment”) (emphasis in original).

27

2

28

3

See Docket No. 60.

Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 636(c)(6)); see also
1
Case No. 5:14-cv-03701-PSG
ORDER RE: CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION

1

consent to trial and other proceedings before a magistrate judge.” 4 Absent extraordinary

2

circumstances and leave from the court, Campbell may not unilaterally revoke his consent to

3

proceed before the undersigned in this case. Should Campbell believe extraordinary circumstance

4

supports reassignment of this case, the court will entertain a renewed motion on the issue without

5

prejudice.

6
7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 3, 2014
_________________________________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b); Fellman v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 735 F.2d 55, 58 (2d Cir. 1984) (“Once a
case is referred to a magistrate under section 636(c), the reference can be withdrawn only by the
district court, and only for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary
circumstances shown by any party”) (emphasis in original, quotation and citation omitted).
4

Id. (citing Carter v. Sea-Land Servs., 816 F.2d 1018, 1020 (5th Cir. 1987)
We find nothing in the statute or the legislative history that requires continuing expressions
of consent before a magistrate can exercise authority under a valid reference. Nor will we
accept the slippery-slope invitation to read into the statute a rule that would allow a party to
express conditional consent to a reference, thereby obtaining what amounts to a free shot at
a favorable outcome or a veto of an unfavorable outcome. Any such rule would allow the
party to hold the power of consent over the magistrate like a sword of Damocles, ready to
strike the reference should the magistrate issue a ruling not quite to the party’s liking. We
will not countenance such fast and loose toying with the judicial system.

2
Case No. 5:14-cv-03701-PSG
ORDER RE: CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION