Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01644/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01644-9/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 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ASKIA ASHANTI, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BARACK OBAMA, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2: 14-cv-1644 JAM KJN P 

ORDER 

 On January 7, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the April 29, 2015 and 

August 7, 2015 orders by the Magistrate Judge (see ECF Nos. 34, 44) denying plaintiff’s requests 

to change the names in the court caption. (ECF No. 64.) Plaintiff also seeks reconsideration of 

the January 20, 2015 order by the Magistrate Judge (see ECF No. 25) dismissing plaintiff’s 

second amended complaint with leave to amend. (ECF No. 64.) Plaintiff also requests that the 

court issue a scheduling order and appoint counsel. (Id.) 

 Plaintiff’s request for issuance of a scheduling order and for appointment of counsel 

should be addressed to the magistrate judge rather than the undersigned. See 28 U.S. C. § 636(c), 

Eastern District Local Rule 302. Accordingly, these requests are disregarded. 

 Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge on August 21, 2014. (ECF 

No. 6.) The undersigned was appointed to this action on August 13, 2015, after defendants failed 

to consent to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction. (ECF No. 46.) Thus, plaintiff had consented to 

Case 2:14-cv-01644-JAM-KJN Document 70 Filed 02/18/16 Page 1 of 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 

2

the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction at the time the magistrate judge issued the orders denying his 

requests to change the names in the court caption and dismissing plaintiff’s second amended 

complaint. Under these circumstances, plaintiff cannot reconsideration of these orders to the 

undersigned. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s January 7, 2016 motion for 

reconsideration, etc. (ECF No. 64) is denied. 

 

DATED: 2/18/2016 

 /s/ John A. Mendez________________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 2:14-cv-01644-JAM-KJN Document 70 Filed 02/18/16 Page 2 of 2