Solomon James M. Andrews v. Sui Qingbo, et al.

District Court, N.D. California·Decided March 23, 2026·No. 5:25-cv-09804·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 SOLOMON JAMES M. ANDREWS, Case No. 25-cv-09804-SVK g Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO 9 v. REASSIGN CASE 10 SUI QINGBO, et al., 11 Defendants. All named parties, including unserved defendants, must consent before a magistrate E 13 || judge has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) to hear and decide a case. See 14 || Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503 (9th Cir. 2017) (magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction 15 || to dismiss case on initial screening because unserved defendants had not consented to a 16 || proceed before magistrate judge). It appears that this case requires a decision dispositive 17 || of one or more defendants or claims at this time, and consent of all parties has not been 18 || obtained. Accordingly, the Clerk shall reassign this case to a district judge pursuant to the 19 || Court’s assignment plan. 21 Dated: March 23, 2026 22 23 Sess vet Susan van Keulen 24 United States Magistrate Judge 25 26 27 28

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

Solomon James M. Andrews v. Sui Qingbo, et al., (N.D. Cal. 2026).

Solomon James M. Andrews v. Sui Qingbo, et al. (Solomon James M. Andrews v. Sui Qingbo, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Michael Williams v. Audrey King
875 F.3d 500 (Ninth Circuit, 2017)