IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 5, 2009
EDWARD THOMAS, PLAINTIFF,
J. WRIGHT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The parties are informed that they may, if all consent in writing, have this case assigned to a United States Magistrate Judge for all purposes while preserving their right to appeal any final judgment directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit or, where appropriate, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), (3); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1); E.D. Cal. Local Rule 73-305(a), (c). The parties are advised that they are free to withhold consent and that doing so shall not result in any adverse substantive consequences. See § 636(c)(2). If all parties consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, the action will be reassigned to the undersigned for all purposes, including entry of final judgment. See Local Rule 73-301 and Local Rule 73-305(b).
A review of the record reflects that all parties to this action have not filed a written election regarding consent to the exercise of full jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge. Specifically, while plaintiff has consented (see Doc. 7), defendants have not made any election. The Clerk of the Court will be directed to provide defendants with the appropriate form which they shall then complete, indicating either consent or non-consent as they may choose, and file with the court.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to forward to defendants the court's "Notice of Availability of a Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction and Appeal Instructions" along with the accompanying consent election form; and
2. Defendants shall complete and file the consent election form within 15 days of the date of this order.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.