Rothschild v. Gildred

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MAYER AMSCHEL ROTHSCHILD, Case No. 23-cv-02105-LJC

8 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING REFILING OF 9 v. DECLINATION AS NOTICED MOTION PURSUANT TO CIVIL 10 STEPHANIE ANN GILDRED, et al., LOCAL RULE 7-2 11 Defendants. Re: ECF No. 31

12 13 On August 28, 2023, Plaintiff Mayer Amschel Rothschild1 filed a consent to proceed 14 before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. ECF No. 15. On May 18, 2024, Mr. 15 Rothschild filed a declination to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. 16 ECF No. 31. If Mr. Rothschild wishes to withdraw his consent to proceed before a magistrate 17 judge, then he must file a motion to do so—he cannot withdraw his consent simply by filing a 18 declination form. See E.D. v. Cnty. of Contra Costa, No. 20-CV-03014-SK (JSW), 2022 WL 19 1015992, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 5, 2022) (“[T]he earlier filing of the declination form did not 20 constitute an effective withdrawal of Plaintiff’s consent to magistrate jurisdiction. Rather, the 21 court required Plaintiff to submit a motion to withdraw consent…”); Stuckey v. Juarez, No. 1:18- 22 1 Plaintiff originally filed the Complaint in this action as Thomas Etienne Rothschild. ECF No. 1. 23 On November 13, 2023, he filed a Notice of Change of Address as Mayer Amschel Rothschild. ECF No. 16. Mr. Rothschild did not submit any proof of a name change to the Court. However, 24 he filed a similar Notice of Change of Address in the related case before the Court, Rothschild v. The Pacific Companies, Case No. 23-cv-01721-LJC, ECF No. 27 (Nov. 14, 2023). That Notice of 25 Change of Address attached an Order Changing Name of An Adult from the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County. Id., ECF No. 27-1. The state court order shows that Mr. 26 Rothschild’s legal name is now Mayer Amschel Rothschild. The Court hereby takes judicial notice of that state court order in this action. See U.S. ex rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens 27 Council v. Borneo, Inc., 971 F.2d 244, 248 (9th Cir. 1992) (noting that a court can take judicial 1 cv-01557-SAB(PC), ECF No. 40, at pp. 1-2 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2020) (finding it insufficient for a 2 || plaintiff who previously consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction to withdraw consent by filing a 3 consent form and instead requiring the plaintiff file a motion to withdraw consent). Any motion to 4 || withdraw consent shall be a duly noticed motion governed by the procedures for motion practice 5 as set forth in Civil Local Rule 7-2. And such motion, if filed, will be reassigned to the general 6 || duty judge for decision for disposition when ripe. See Branch vy. Umphenour, 936 F.3d 994, 1003 7 (9th Cir. 2019) (“[OJnly a district judge may rule on a motion to withdraw consent to the 8 || jurisdiction of a magistrate judge under section 636(c)(4).”) 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 || Dated: May 21, 2024 11 12 LISA ¥. CISNEROS 13 U States Magistrate Judge © 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28