California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. City of Santa Cruz et al

Filing 22

ORDER REQUESTING CLARIFICATION ON STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OR ADDITIONAL CONSENT/DECLINATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION BY INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS Re: Dkt. No. 20 . Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 8/10/2015. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/10/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING
PROTECTION ALLIANCE,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Plaintiff,

Case No.15-cv-00714-NC

15

ORDER REQUESTING
CLARIFICATION ON
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OR
ADDITIONAL
CONSENT/DECLINATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
JURISDICTION BY INDIVIDUAL
DEFENDANTS

16

Re: Dkt. No. 20

12
v.
13
14

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, et al.,
Defendants.

17
The Court has reviewed the Stipulation to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claims With

18
19

Prejudice and Proposed Order, Dkt. No. 20. The Proposed Order asks that the Court

20

“retain and have jurisdiction over the Parties” with respect to future disputes arising under

21

the Settlement Agreement. The term “Parties” is not defined in the Stipulation. If

22

“Parties” is limited to CSPA and City of Santa Cruz, the Court is prepared to grant the

23

Proposed Order. If “Parties” includes the individual defendants Pearson, Seifert and

24

Schneiter, then the Court has a jurisdictional problem. Those defendants have not

25

consented to the jurisdiction of a U.S. magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §

26

636(c).

27

//

28
Case No.:15-cv-00714-NC

1

Accordingly, the parties are requested by August 24 to clarify whether (1) “Parties”

2

includes the individual defendants; and if so (2) whether the individual defendants consent

3

or decline the jurisdiction of a U.S. magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §

4

636(c). This will permit the Court to act on the Stipulation to Dismiss.

5

Plaintiff’s counsel might anticipate this issue in future settlement agreements by

6

including in paragraph 13 of the standard settlement agreement a consent to magistrate

7

judge jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), in addition to a consent to the jurisdiction of

8

the District Court for the Northern District of California.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 10, 2015

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

_____________________________________
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No.:15-cv-00714-NC

2