Lauderdale v. Garcia

7 F. App'x 602
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 22, 2001
DocketNo. 99-56511; D.C. No. CV-99-00108-LAB
StatusPublished

This text of 7 F. App'x 602 (Lauderdale v. Garcia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lauderdale v. Garcia, 7 F. App'x 602 (9th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM2

Raymond Lauderdale, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the termination of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to file a timely amended complaint.

We raise sua sponte the issue of our own jurisdiction. See Nasca v. Peoplesoft (In re Marriage of Nasca), 160 F.3d 578, 579 (9th Cir.1998). Because the record does not contain a written consent by the defendants to the exercise of authority by a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the magistrate judge acted without jurisdiction. See id. at 580. In turn, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. See id.

No party shall recover costs in this court.

The district court is directed to vacate the order of the magistrate judge, filed July 21, 1999, and the subsequent orders, filed July 22, 1999, and August 25, 1999.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 F. App'x 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lauderdale-v-garcia-ca9-2001.