Annamalai, Annamalai v. Emmerich, Warden
Filing
9
ORDER denying 8 Motion to Stay Proceedings. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 06/03/2024. (acd),(ps)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ANNAMALAI ANNAMALAI,
Petitioner,
v.
ORDER
24-cv-132-jdp
WARDEN EMMERICH,
Respondent.
ANNAMALAI ANNAMALAI,
Petitioner,
v.
ORDER
24-cv-167-jdp
EVERICH,
Respondent.
ANNAMALAI ANNAMALAI,
Petitioner,
v.
ORDER
24-cv-204-jdp
WARDEN EMMERICH,
Respondent.
ANNAMALAI ANNAMALAI,
Petitioner,
v.
ORDER
24-cv-205-jdp
WARDEN EMMERICH,
Respondent.
Petitioner Annamalai Annamalai asks me to vacate the orders that magistrate judges
have entered in the above cases, contending that they lacked jurisdiction to enter those orders
because he didn’t consent to their jurisdiction. I will deny these motions.
As allowed under federal law, the court has adopted Local Rule 2, which authorizes
magistrate judges to “hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before this court.”
Consent of the parties is not required to have the magistrate judge serve this function. Having
the magistrate judge decide nondispositive matters allows the presiding judge to focus on
case-dispositive decisions, which keeps cases from getting bogged down.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Dkt. 20 in 24-cv-132-jdp, Dkt. 10 in 24-cv-167-jdp, Dkt. 8 in 24-cv-204-jdp, and
Dkt. 9 in 24-cv-205-jdp are DENIED.
2. The clerk of court is directed to send petitioner Annamalai Annamalai a copy of this
order.
Entered June 3, 2024.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge
2
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?