Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 8, 2020

Ontiveros v. Dominguez

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:19-cv-07496
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureCivil RightsPro Se
In one sentence

Ontiveros v. Dominguez was reassigned to a district judge because dismissal was possible and not all parties had consented, ordered by Judge Demarchi.

Who this affects

Israel Ontiveros and the defendants in the case were affected by the reassignment; the order did not decide the underlying claims.

What happened

In Ontiveros v. Dominguez, Israel Ontiveros, a state prisoner without a lawyer, sued prison defendants under a federal civil-rights law. The court had dismissed his original complaint with permission to amend, but he did not file an amended complaint by the deadline.

The order did not dismiss the case. Instead, it explained that a magistrate judge could not decide a dismissal because all parties, including defendants who had not been served, had not consented to magistrate-judge jurisdiction.

The court ordered the clerk to reassign the case to a district judge. United States Magistrate Judge Virginia K. Demarchi signed the order on June 8, 2020.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Ontiveros v. Dominguez · No. 4:19-cv-07496
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
June 8, 2020

Background

Israel Ontiveros, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants at Salinas Valley State Prison. After an initial screening, the court dismissed the complaint with permission to amend. The court directed Ontiveros to file an amended complaint by April 15, 2020, but he did not do so. The order stated that the action was therefore subject to dismissal.

Reason for Reassignment

The court explained that all named parties, including defendants who had not been served, must consent before a magistrate judge may hear and decide the case. Because the case appeared to require a decision that could dispose of claims against some or all defendants, and because not all parties had consented, a district judge had to handle the matter.

Disposition

The court ordered the clerk to reassign the case to a district judge under the court’s assignment plan. This order reassigned the case; it did not itself dismiss the complaint or resolve the underlying civil-rights claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.