Garcia v. Alvarez
- Sallie Kim
- 3:22-cv-01217
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Garcia v. Alvarez, Judge Sallie Kim directed defendants to file a motion to withdraw consent before seeking reassignment to a district judge.
The parties—Orlando Garcia, Eva Irene Alvarez, and Francisco Alvarez—with the defendants’ requested judicial reassignment not taking effect without the required motion process.
What happened
Garcia v. Alvarez concerns whether defendants could withdraw their consent to have the case handled by a magistrate judge.
All parties had consented to magistrate-judge jurisdiction. Defendants later filed a declination of consent and asked that the case be reassigned to a district judge.
Judge Sallie Kim ordered that defendants must file a motion to withdraw consent under the applicable procedures before reassignment could be considered. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Garcia v. Alvarez · No. 3:22-cv-01217
- Sallie Kim
- Aug. 10, 2022
Background
Orlando Garcia consented to magistrate-judge jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Defendants Eva Irene Alvarez and Francisco Alvarez later consented as well, so all parties had consented and Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim obtained jurisdiction over the case. Defendants subsequently filed a purported declination of consent and requested reassignment to a district judge.
Court’s reasoning
The court explained that, after all parties consent to proceedings before a magistrate judge under Section 636(c), the reference may be withdrawn only for good cause on the court’s own motion or when a party shows extraordinary circumstances. The court cited the statute, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, and Ninth Circuit precedent.
Order
Judge Sallie Kim directed that, if defendants seek to withdraw their consent and have the case reassigned to a district judge, they must file a motion to withdraw consent under the district’s procedures. The order did not rule on the merits of the underlying dispute or state that defendants’ filing was granted or denied.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.