From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tomlin v. United States

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
May 2, 2023
2:23-cv-0190-KJN (E.D. Cal. May. 2, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-0190-KJN

05-02-2023

SUSAN TOMLIN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.


ORDER

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On January 31, 2023, plaintiff, Susan Tomlin, filed this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act against defendant, United States of America. (ECF No. 1.) Defendant filed an answer on April 17, 2023. (ECF No. 4.)

This case was randomly assigned to participate in the court's automated case assignment plan pursuant to Appendix A of the Local Rules. (ECF No. 3.) See Local Rules, Appendix A, subsection (m). Upon consent of both parties, the undersigned will have jurisdiction over this case for all purposes, including dispositive matters. Under the Initial Scheduling Order, all parties were to inform the Clerk of Court of their decision whether to consent or decline to magistrate judge jurisdiction for all purposes in this case by filing their Consent/Decline form (ECF No. 3-1) within ninety days of the date the action was filed, in this case by May 1, 2023. (ECF No. 3 at 2, para. 2.) A review of the docket indicates that no Consent/Decline forms have yet been submitted. There is no obligation to consent, and no judge will be notified of a party's decision unless all parties have consented. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 73(b)(1). However, for proper case administration, each party must inform the Clerk of Court whether it consents to magistrate judge jurisdiction for all purposes. Therefore, the court ORDERS that all parties file their Consent/Decline forms within seven days.

Additionally, the Initial Scheduling Order required parties to file a joint status report within thirty days of filing an answer addressing the subjects listed in Local Rule 240(a) to assist the court in setting a scheduling order for the case. (See ECF No. 3 at 2, para. 3.) However, that deadline only applies if all parties consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction for all purposes under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). If not all parties consent, this case would be randomly reassigned to a district judge as presiding judge, and that district judge would direct the case's scheduling. (See ECF No. 3 at 1.)

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all parties file their Consent/Decline forms within seven days of this order.


Summaries of

Tomlin v. United States

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
May 2, 2023
2:23-cv-0190-KJN (E.D. Cal. May. 2, 2023)
Case details for

Tomlin v. United States

Case Details

Full title:SUSAN TOMLIN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: May 2, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-0190-KJN (E.D. Cal. May. 2, 2023)