TYRAN v. KIJAKAZI (2023)

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Order. ECF No. 18. By consent of all parties, the District Judge transferred this case to Judge Palermo to conduct all proceedings, including entering final judgment. ECF No. 9. Accordingly, after considering the parties' briefings, the record, and applicable law, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order affirming the Commissioner's decision and dismissing the instant case with prejudice. ECF No. 16. The Court also entered a final judgment. ECF No. 17. Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Memorandum and Order, misidentifying it as a Report & Recommendation. See ECF No. 18. Plaintiff's Objection was improperly made, given that the Court's Order was not a Report & Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).² Therefore, Plaintiff's Objection is hereby DENIED. ECF No. 18.³

FOOTNOTES

2.   Throughout the Objection, Plaintiff's counsel misidentifies Judge Palermo as “Magistrate.” ECF No. 18 at 2, 3. The title magistrate is obsolete in the United States Courts. More than thirty years ago, Congress created the title of United States Magistrate Judge to reflect the role we play in relieving the burgeoning caseloads of the United States District Courts and the corresponding burdens on district judges. Judicial Improvements Act of 1990, 104 Stat. 5089, Pub. L. No. 101-650, § 321 (1990) (“After the enactment of this Act, each United States magistrate ․ shall be known as a United States magistrate judge.”). Calling a magistrate judge “magistrate” is the equivalent of calling a district judge “district,” or a bankruptcy judge “bankruptcy.” The proper way to refer to a magistrate judge orally or in writing is “Judge.” It is an important distinction that Plaintiff's counsel failed to recognize. See Bird v. Nat'l Aeronautics & Space Agency, No. 4:20-CV-275, 2022 WL 90515, at *1, n.1 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 7, 2022); Young v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., No. 20-CV-01816-LK, 2022 WL 1061940, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 8, 2022); Bormuth v. Whitmer, 548 F. Supp. 3d 640, 642 n.1 (E.D. Mich. 2021); United States v. Higby, 544 F.Supp.3d 861 (S.D. Iowa 2015); Sanches v. Carrollton-Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 647 F.3d 156, 172, n.13 (5th Cir. 2011). Counsel is reminded to use the correct title, in the future, when referring to Judge Palermo or any magistrate judge.

3.   The proper mechanism to contest the Court's Memorandum & Order is an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). In suits in which a federal officer is a party sued in an official capacity, the time for appeal does not end until 60 days after the entry of a Rule 58 judgment. Id.; see Freeman v. Shalala, 2 F.3d 552, 554 (5th Cir. 1993).

Dena Hanovice Palermo, United States Magistrate Judge