From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Greene v. Tilton

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 3, 2011
No. 2:09-cv-0793 JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2011)

Opinion

No. 2:09-cv-0793 JFM (PC).

January 3, 2011


ORDER


On April 2, 2009, plaintiff filed a consent to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge to decide all matters in his case. On August 3, 2010, plaintiff filed a statement withdrawing his consent and seeking reassignment before a district judge.

Plaintiff's motion requesting reassignment does not set forth the basis for the request. Parties may not withdraw their consents without a showing of good cause or under extraordinary circumstances. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); McGrath v. Everest Nat. Ins. Co., 2009 WL 4842837 (N.D. Ill. 2009); Brook, Weiner, Sered, Kreger Weinberg v. Coreq, Inc., 53 F.3d 851, 852 (7th Cir. 1995). Plaintiff has failed to show good cause for the reassignment request, and therefore, the motion will be denied.

Discovery is now closed and the time for filing dispositive motions has passed with no such motions filed by either party. Further, despite an order on May 29, 2009 to the defendants to submit their position regarding the jurisdiction of the undersigned by September 29, 2009, defendants have not yet responded to the court order. Therefore, in order to issue a scheduling order setting forth the trial date in this matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to withdraw consent is denied; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this matter.

DATED: January 3, 2011.


Summaries of

Greene v. Tilton

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 3, 2011
No. 2:09-cv-0793 JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2011)
Case details for

Greene v. Tilton

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD H. GREENE, Plaintiff, v. JAMES TILTON, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 3, 2011

Citations

No. 2:09-cv-0793 JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2011)