QUIROGA III v. CHAPA (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Monico J. Quiroga III appeals pro se from the magistrate judge’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging sexual assault by a correctional officer while in pretrial detention. 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.

Quiroga consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The magistrate judge then screened Quiroga’s action and dismissed all defendants except for defendant Chapa before the named defendants had been served, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and dismissed the action for failure to serve defendant Chapa pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). 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 order and remand for further proceedings.

VACATED and REMANDED.