Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-07-01334/USCOURTS-ca10-07-01334-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
J. Brown
Appellee
C/O Jackson
Appellee
C/O Valdez
Appellee
E. Cella
Appellee
K. Cooper
Appellee
E. Diclusion
Appellee
Jose Medina Escobar
Appellant
D. Gallagher
Appellee
T. Haucks
Appellee
A. Luna
Appellee
L. Montoya
Appellee
E. Mora
Appellee
R. Olivett
Appellee
E. Perry
Appellee
L. Reid
Appellee
Sgt. Binder
Appellee
J. Sims
Appellee
R. Wencl
Appellee
J. Wermers
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

JOSE MEDINA ESCOBAR,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v. 

L. REID; K. COOPER; E. CELLA; T.

HAUCKS; E. PERRY; D.

GALLAGHER; SGT. BINDER; C/O

VALDEZ; J. BROWN; J. SIMS; E.

DICLUSION; E. MORA; A. LUNA;

R. WENCL; J. WERMERS; R.

OLIVETT; C/O JACKSON; L.

MONTOYA, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 07-1334

ORDER

Filed September 11, 2007

Before LUCERO, TYMKOVICH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

On August 3, 2007, a United States magistrate judge entered a minute order

denying Plaintiff”s motion for temporary restraining order and/or preliminary

injunction. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, appeals.

Except for proceedings conducted by a magistrate judge upon designation by

Appellate Case: 07-1334 Document: 010130522 Date Filed: 09/11/2007 Page: 1 
2

a district judge and consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), orders

entered by a magistrate judge are not final or immediately appealable. “[W]e have

consistently recognized that ‘[a] magistrate exercising “additional duties”

jurisdiction remains constantly subject to the inherent supervisory power of the

district judge and the judge retains the ultimate responsibility for decision making

in every instance.’ ” Colorado Bldg. & Const. Tr. Coun. v. Andersen Const., 879

F.2d 809, 811 (10th Cir. 1989); see Phillips v. Beierwaltes, 466 F.3d 1217, 1221

(10th Cir. 2006).

In this case, the parties did not consent to final disposition by a magistrate

judge. Consequently, the magistrate judge’s August 3, 2007 minute order is

interlocutory and not immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 or under any

recognized exception to the final judgment rule. This minute order may be appealed

upon entry of an order by the district judge denying Plaintiff’s motion for

preliminary injunction, see 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a), or upon entry of a final judgment

by the district judge in Plaintiff’s civil rights action.

This appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction. 

Entered for the Court,

Elisabeth A. Shumaker, Clerk

Kathleen T. Clifford

Attorney - Deputy Clerk

Appellate Case: 07-1334 Document: 010130522 Date Filed: 09/11/2007 Page: 2