Skip to main content

MORET v. Oregon State Hospital, Defendant. (2020)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Andrew Guy MORET, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Poornima RANGANATHAN; Andrea Dailey, Defendants-Appellees, Oregon State Hospital, Defendant.

No. 19-36109

Decided: October 29, 2020

Before: McKEOWN, RAWLINSON, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Andrew Guy Moret, Pro Se Patrick Michael Ebbett, Assistant Attorney General, AGOR - Office of the Oregon Attorney General, Salem, OR, for Defendants-Appellees


Andrew Guy Moret appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of due process due to the involuntary administration of medication during his pretrial detention. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge had jurisdiction. Allen v. Meyer, 755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand.

None of the parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The magistrate judge dismissed Moret's state law claims, as well all claims against defendant Oregon State Hospital. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). 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, 503-4 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge's July 18, 2018 order and remand for further proceedings as to the dismissed claims and defendant.

In light of our disposition, we do not consider Moret's contentions regarding summary judgment.

Moret's request to submit additional documentation (Docket Entry No. 11) is denied.

The parties will bear their own costs on appeal.


Copied to clipboard