Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00800/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00800-25/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Virgil E. Holt is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Following resolution of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, against Defendants 

Nicholas, Holguin, Ortega, Machado, and Juden on Plaintiff’s claim of excessive force, failure to 

intervene, and deliberate indifference to a serious medical claim in violation of the Eighth 

Amendment, and against Defendant Velasco on Plaintiff’s claim of deliberate indifference to a serious 

medical need in violation of the Eighth Amendment. This action is ready to be set for jury trial. 

This Court's Fresno Division carries the heaviest U.S. District Judge caseload in the nation. 

Although this Court uses its best efforts to resolve civil cases timely, this Court is unable to meet the 

parties’ needs and expectations. With multiple trials set on the same date, cases trail until the assigned 

District Judge becomes available. As required by law, this Court gives criminal cases priority over 

civil trials and other matters. This Court must proceed with criminal trials even if a civil action is 

older or its trial was set earlier. Continuances of civil trials under these circumstances will no longer 

be entertained, absent absolute good cause. If multiple trials are scheduled to begin on the same day, 

trial in this civil action will trail day to day or week to week until completion of any criminal case or 

older civil case. Moreover, trial in this civil action is subject to suspension mid-trial to accommodate 

VIRGIL E. HOLT,

 Plaintiff,

v.

R. NICHOLAS, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:09-cv-00800-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO NOTIFY 

COURT WHETHER THEY WILL CONSENT TO 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION WITHIN 

FOURTEEN DAYS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 

SEND CONSENT FORMS 

Case 1:09-cv-00800-SAB Document 145 Filed 03/20/15 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

criminal cases.

One of this Court's U.S. Magistrate Judges is available to conduct all proceedings in this 

action, including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 73, and Local Rule 305. The same jury pool is used by Magistrate Judges and District 

Judges. An appeal from Magistrate Judge proceedings is taken directly to the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals when the parties consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This Court will direct its Clerk to 

provide the parties with the Court’s form to consent to or decline Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Within 

fourteen days of this order’s date of service, the parties shall file and serve their form to indicate 

whether they consent to or decline Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. 

Moreover, this Court's Fresno Division randomly and without advance notice reassigns civil 

actions to District Judges throughout the nation to serve as visiting judges. In the absence of 

Magistrate Judge consent, this action is subject to reassignment to a 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 one of this Court's Magistrate 

Judges.

Accordingly, the Court orders that: 

1. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to provide the parties with the form that will 

allow them to consent or decline Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction; and 

2. Within fourteen days from this order’s date of service, the parties shall notify the Court 

whether they consent to or decline Magistrate Judge jurisdiction by filling out the enclosed forms and 

returning them to the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 20, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00800-SAB Document 145 Filed 03/20/15 Page 2 of 2