Liu v. City of Reno

Opinion

kee FRANK LIU, Case No. 3:22-cv-00551-CLB Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO RANDOMLY REASSIGN CASE TO V. DISTRICT JUDGE FOR DECISION ON CITY OF RENO, et. a/., MOTION ID STAYING CASE Defendants. On May 18, 2023, this case was referred to the undersigned on consent in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636. (ECF No. 23.) On September 23, 2023, Plaintiff Frank Liu filed a motion to withdraw his consent to proceed before a magistrate judge. (ECF No. 42.) In 2019, the Ninth Circuit explicitly ruled only a district judge may rule on a motion to withdraw consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. Branch v. Umphenour, 936 F.3d 994, 1001-02 (9th Cir. 2019) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(4); Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(3)); see also Brown v. Leachman, 2018 WL 827233 at *1 (N.D. Cal., Mar. 4, 2021) (order from magistrate judge in consent case wherein the appellate court directed the magistrate to transfer the case such that a district judge could decide, in the first instance, whether or not the plaintiff should have been permitted to withdraw consent to proceed before a magistrate judge). Accordingly, the Clerk shall randomly reassign this case to a district judge for decision on the motion to withdraw consent, (ECF No. 42). Additionally, all deadlines shall be stayed until a decision on the motion to withdraw consent is rendered. DATED: September 25, 2023. . UNITED‘STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE