MCCOY v. RAMIREZ CCI (2018)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

LaKeith L. MCCOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J. RAMIREZ, Correctional Officer at CCI; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-16268

Decided: February 23, 2018

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

LaKeith L. McCoy, Pro Se Matthew Roman, Attorney, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, John Randall Andrada, Esquire, Attorney, Andrada & Associates, Professional Corporation, Oakland, CA, for Defendant-Appellee

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner LaKeith L. McCoy appeals pro se from the magistrate judge’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force and due process claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge validly entered judgment on behalf of the district court. Allen v. Meyer, 755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand.

McCoy and defendant Ramirez consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The magistrate judge, however, screened and dismissed claims against other named defendants in the action before those defendants had been served. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), 1915A. Because all parties, including unserved defendants, must consent to proceed before the magistrate judge for jurisdiction to vest, Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503-04 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge’s orders and remand for further proceedings.

VACATED and REMANDED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law