Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00722/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00722-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUIS ESTRADA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-00722-MMC 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 

DECLINATION

Before the Court is plaintiff's "Consent or Declination to Magistrate Judge 

Jurisdiction," in which plaintiff states he declines to have a magistrate judge conduct all 

further proceedings in the above-titled action. The declination was filed July 1, 2016, one

day after the filing of defendants' consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction and the Court's 

issuance of an order of reference to a magistrate judge for all further proceedings, which 

order was based on both parties' having consented in writing to magistrate judge 

jurisdiction. (See Pl.'s Consent, filed April 27, 2016; Defs.' Consent, filed June 30, 2016.)

Given the prior written consents and the absence of any showing by plaintiff of 

"extraordinary circumstances" warranting an order vacating the Court's order of June 30, 

2016, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(4), plaintiff's declination is hereby DENIED. See Dixon v. 

Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 479-80 (9th Cir. 1993) (affirming order denying declination, where 

plaintiff previously filed consent to magistrate judge for all purposes).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2016

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-00722-MEJ Document 24 Filed 07/06/16 Page 1 of 1