Opinion
22 Civ. 9779 (AT) (RWL)
11-18-2022
RYAN O'DELL, Plaintiff, v. POSHMARK, INC., MANISH CHANDRA, NAVIN CHADDHA, EBONY BECKWITH, JEFF EPTSTEIN, JENNY MING, HANS TUNG, AND SERENA J. WILLIAMS, Defendants.
ORDER
ANALISA TORRES, DISTRICT JUDGE.
To conserve resources, to promote judicial efficiency, and in an effort to achieve a faster disposition of this matter, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties discuss whether they are willing to consent, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to conducting all further proceedings before the assigned Magistrate Judge.
If all par ties consent to proceed before the Magistrate Judge, counsel for Defendant shall, by January 17, 2023, file a frilly executed Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form, available at https://nvsd.uscourts.gov/node/754 and attached to this order, on the docket. If the Court approves that form, all further proceedings will then be conducted before the assigned Magistrate Judge rather than before me. An information sheet on proceedings before magistrate judges is also attached to this order. Any appeal would be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Cir cuit, as it would be if the consent form were not signed and so ordered.
If any party does not consent to conducting all further proceedings before the assigned Magistrate Judge, the parties must file a joint letter, by January 17, 2023, advising the Court that the parties do not consent, but without disclosing the identity of the party' or parties who do not consent. The parties are free to withhold consent without negative consequences.
SO ORDERED.