(PC) Baker v. Lynch

E.D. California

(PC) Baker v. Lynch

DecidedAugust 11, 2023

Docket2:19-cv-02617

StatusUnknown

This text of (PC) Baker v. Lynch ((PC) Baker v. Lynch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(PC) Baker v. Lynch, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 | Timothy Ray Baker, No. 2:19-cev-02617-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. J. Howard, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 17 After determining each of the parties had filed a consent to proceed before a magistrate 18 | judge, this court reassigned and referred the case to a magistrate judge for all further proceedings 19 | im accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). See Prior Order, ECF No. 62. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff 20 | Timothy Baker filed a form declining consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. Decline 21 | Consent, ECF No. 63. The court construes the form as a motion to withdraw consent. “[O]nly a 22 | district judge may rule on a motion to withdraw consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge.” 23 | Branch v. Umphenour, 936 F.3d 994, 1003 (9th Cir. 2019). Therefore, the court retains 24 | jurisdiction for the limited purpose of ruling on the motion to withdraw consent and denies the 25 | motion. 26 “Once a civil case is referred to a magistrate judge under section 636(c), the reference can 27 | be withdrawn by the court only ‘for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary 28 | circumstances shown by any party.’” Dixon v. Yist, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing

1 | 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b), and Fellman v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 2 | 735 F.2d 55, 58 (2d Cir.1984)). In civil cases there is “no absolute right” to withdraw consent to 3 | the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. See id. 4 Here, plaintiff does not provide any explanation as to why he now declines consent; 5 | plaintiff has not shown good cause or extraordinary circumstances. Accordingly, the motion to 6 | withdraw consent is denied. The matter is reassigned and referred back to the magistrate Judge 7 | for all further proceedings and entry of final judgment. 8 This order resolves ECF No. 63. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 DATED: August 10, 2023. 1] CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 | Timothy Ray Baker, No. 2:19-cev-02617-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. J. Howard, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 17 After determining each of the parties had filed a consent to proceed before a magistrate 18 | judge, this court reassigned and referred the case to a magistrate judge for all further proceedings 19 | im accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). See Prior Order, ECF No. 62. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff 20 | Timothy Baker filed a form declining consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. Decline 21 | Consent, ECF No. 63. The court construes the form as a motion to withdraw consent. “[O]nly a 22 | district judge may rule on a motion to withdraw consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge.” 23 | Branch v. Umphenour, 936 F.3d 994, 1003 (9th Cir. 2019). Therefore, the court retains 24 | jurisdiction for the limited purpose of ruling on the motion to withdraw consent and denies the 25 | motion. 26 “Once a civil case is referred to a magistrate judge under section 636(c), the reference can 27 | be withdrawn by the court only ‘for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary 28 | circumstances shown by any party.’” Dixon v. Yist, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing

1 | 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b), and Fellman v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 2 | 735 F.2d 55, 58 (2d Cir.1984)). In civil cases there is “no absolute right” to withdraw consent to 3 | the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. See id. 4 Here, plaintiff does not provide any explanation as to why he now declines consent; 5 | plaintiff has not shown good cause or extraordinary circumstances. Accordingly, the motion to 6 | withdraw consent is denied. The matter is reassigned and referred back to the magistrate Judge 7 | for all further proceedings and entry of final judgment. 8 This order resolves ECF No. 63. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 DATED: August 10, 2023. 1] CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(PC) Baker v. Lynch, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pc-baker-v-lynch-caed-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack