Opinion
NOTICE TO PARTIES REGARDING IMPACTED TRIAL CALENDAR AND AVAILABILITY OF CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION; ORDER REQUIRING STATUS REPORT RE PREPAREDENESS FOR TRIAL
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
In this action, Plaintiff claims Defendants Baer, Valdez, Buenos, Lee, Ponce, and Purvis used excessive force on him in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Since both sides indicated that a settlement conference may be beneficial, one was scheduled and conducted on August 4, 2015. However, it was unsuccessful. ( See Doc. 278.) Thus, it is time to set this matter for trial. The parties are hereby notified of the following regarding Judge O'Neill's impacted trial calendar and its potential effect on the trial date in this action.
Judges in the Eastern District of California carry the heaviest caseload in the nation which makes this Court unable to devote inordinate time and resources to individual cases and matters. Judge O'Neill must adhere to strict scheduling to best manage his burdensome caseload which variously approaches 2, 000 cases.
This case is currently in line to be placed on Judge O'Neill's trial calendar since Defendants did not consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Civil trials set before Judge O'Neill trail until he becomes available and are subject to suspension mid-trial to accommodate criminal matters. Civil trials are no longer reset to a later date if Judge O'Neill is unavailable on the original date set for trial. If a trial trails, it may proceed with little advance notice and the parties and counsel may be expected to proceed to trial with less than 24-hours' notice. Moreover, this Court's Fresno Division randomly and without advance notice reassigns civil actions to U.S. District Judges throughout the nation who serve as visiting judges as they become available. In the absence of Magistrate Judge consent, this action is subject to reassignment to a U.S. District Judge from outside the Eastern District of California.
Case management difficulties, including trial setting and interruption, are avoided if the parties consent to conduct of further proceedings by a U.S. Magistrate Judge. While Plaintiff consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction (Doc. 5) Defendants did not (Doc. 18). Though Defendants are entitled to maintain this position and there would be no ramifications for doing so, given Judge O'Neill's inability to commit time to civil trials and the costs and inconvenience this poses, Defendants are urged to reconsider Magistrate Judge jurisdiction.
On the other hand, given the case posture, the parties must notify the Court of readiness for trial and of available dates for trial. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
For the reasons stated already, there can be no assurance that the trial will proceed on the date proposed.
(1) within 10 days of the date of service of this order, Defendants SHALL file a consent/decline form related to whether they will consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction;
(2) the Clerk's Office is DIRECTED to attach a blank copy of the "Order re Consent or Request for Reassignment" form to this order for Defendants' use; and
(3) within 21 days of the date of service of this order, both sides are to submit status reports indicating whether they are ready to conduct the trial, any impediments to setting the trial date and dates on which they are available for trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AT FRESNO
IMPORTANT: v CHECK AND SIGN ONLY ONE SECTION OF THIS FORM, THEN RETURN IT TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE NOT LATER THAN 20 DAYS FOLLOWING YOUR FIRST APPEARANCE, ANSWER OR RESPONSIVE PLEADING.
[] CONSENT TO JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
In accordance with the provisions of Title 28, U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)(1), the undersigned hereby voluntarily consents to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment, with direct review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in the event an appeal is filed.
[] DECLINE OF JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)(2), the undersigned acknowledges the availability of a United States Magistrate Judge but elects to have this case randomly assigned to a United States District Judge.