Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01222/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01222-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Christopher Austin on behalf of minor son,

S.A.,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

State of Arizona; Arizona Department of

Juvenile Corrections; Michael Branham,

Director of the Arizona Department of

Juvenile Corrections; and Kellie Warren,

Deputy Director for the Arizona

Department of Juvenile Corrections,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-1222-PHX-LOA

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT

AND ORDER

Pursuant to Local Rule (?LRCiv”) 3.8(a), Rules of Practice, effective

December 1, 2007, all civil cases are, and will be, randomly assigned to a U.S. district

judge or to a U.S. magistrate judge. This matter has been assigned to the undersigned U.S.

Magistrate Judge.

As a result of the aforesaid Local Rule, if all parties consent in writing, the

case will remain with the assigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(1) for

all purposes, including trial and final entry of judgment. If any party chooses the district

judge option, the case will be randomly reassigned to a U.S. district judge. To either

consent to the assigned magistrate judge or to elect to have the case heard before a

district judge, the appropriate section of the form, entitled Consent To Exercise Of

Case 2:08-cv-01222-LOA Document 7 Filed 07/16/08 Page 1 of 3
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

1

The consent/election form may be obtained directly from the Clerk of the Court or

by accessing the District of Arizona’s web site at www.azd.uscourts.gov. To find the

consent/election form on the District’s web site, click on “Local Rules” at the top of the page,

then click on “forms” on the left side of the page and then click on and print the appropriate

form.

- 2 -

Jurisdiction By United States Magistrate Judge1

, must be completed, signed and filed.

The party filing the case or removing it to this Court is responsible for serving all parties

with the consent forms. Each party must file a completed consent form and certificate of

service with the Clerk of the Court not later than 20 days after entry of appearance, and

must serve a copy by mail or hand delivery upon all parties of record in the case.

Any party is free to withhold consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction

without adverse consequences. 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(2); Rule 73(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Anderson

v. Woodcreek Venture Ltd., 351 F.3d 911, 913-14 (9th Cir. 2003) (pointing out that

consent is the "touchstone of magistrate judge jurisdiction" under 28 U.S.C. §636(c). “A

party to a federal civil case has, subject to some exceptions, a constitutional right to

proceed before an Article III judge.” Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 479 (9th Cir. 1993)

(citing Pacemaker Diagnostic Clinic of Am. Inc. v. Instromedix, Inc., 725 F.2d 537, 541

(9th Cir. 1984) (en banc)).

A review of the Court’s file indicates that Defendants filed a Notice of

Removal on July 2, 2008.

Defendants shall each have until August 5, 2008, within which to make

their selections to either consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction or elect to proceed before

a U. S. district judge. The Court’s docket reflects the appropriate consent form was

electronically transmitted to all counsel on July 3, 2008 by the Clerk’s office.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants shall each file on or before 

August 5, 2008 their written elections to either consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction or

elect to proceed before a United States district judge.

Case 2:08-cv-01222-LOA Document 7 Filed 07/16/08 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 -

Plaintiff’s agreement to proceed before a magistrate judge was entered by

the Clerk’s office on July 14, 2008.

Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 3, 2008. (docket #5). 

Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss shall be filed no later than

Tuesday, August 5, 2008. Defendants’ Reply shall be filed no later than Monday,

August 25, 2008.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel and any party, if

unrepresented, shall hereinafter comply with the Rules of Practice for the United States

District Court for the District of Arizona, as amended on December 1, 2007. The

District’s Rules of Practice may be found on the District Court’s internet web page at

www.azd.uscourts.gov/. All other rules may be found as www.uscourts.gov/rules/. The

fact that a party is acting pro se does not discharge this party's duties to "abide by the

rules of the court in which he litigates." Carter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 784

F.2d 1006, 1008 (9th Cir. 1986).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel and any party, if

unrepresented, shall use the above caption, number and initials until further order of the

Court.

DATED this 16th day of July, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-01222-LOA Document 7 Filed 07/16/08 Page 3 of 3