Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Edwin Valencia v. Does

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 15, 2012

EDWIN VALENCIA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
DOES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER DECLINING TO ADOPT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDING THAT PLAINTIFF HAS CONSENTED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION (Docs. 7, 8)

Plaintiff Edwin Valencia ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1.) On January 5, 2012, the Court issued an Order Re Consent or Request for Reassignment, requiring Plaintiff to complete and return the form within thirty (30) days, indicating either consent to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Magistrate Judge, or requesting that the case be reassigned to a U.S. District Judge. (Doc. 3.) Again on June 1, 2012, the Court issued an Order Re Consent or Request for Reassignment, requiring Plaintiff to complete and return the form within thirty (30) days. (Doc. 5.) When the thirty (30)-day period expired and petitioner had not returned the form or otherwise responded, a Findings and Recommendation to dismiss the action for Plaintiff's failure to respond issued. (Doc. 7.) Subsequently, Plaintiff signed and filed the form consenting to jurisdiction of U.S. Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 8.) *fn1 Despite having adequately responded, Plaintiff requested an extension of time to respond to the Findings and Recommendation and he was granted thirty (30) additional days. (Docs. 9, 10.) The thirty (30) day extension of time has lapsed and Plaintiff has filed nothing further.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that Plaintiff has consented to U.S. Magistrate Jurisdiction and that dismissal is not appropriate.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 7, 2012, (Doc. 7), is not adopted; and

2. The Clerk's Office is directed to reassigned this case to a Magistrate Judge for all purposes.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.