CINDY K. JORGENSON, District Judge.
Plaintiff initiated this action on January 19, 2017. On March 17, 2017, a party consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction (Doc. 9). On April 10, 2017, another party consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. On that same date, the Clerk of Court issued a Minute Order
4/10/2017 Minute Order (Doc. 15).
On July 25, 2017, Magistrate Judge Eric J. Markovich issued an Order advising Plaintiff of the applicable rules and possible consequences of the Motion to Dismiss Defendant Lorie Hale. 7/25/2017 Order (Doc. 23).
The Court's electronic filing system indicates that, on July 27, 2017, a party agreed to magistrate judge jurisdiction (Doc. 24). On that same date, a party withdrew its consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction (Doc. 25). The Clerk of Court issued a Minute Order
7/27/2017 Minute Order (Doc. 26).
However, where consent to a magistrate judge has been given, i.e., the case has been "referred to a magistrate judge under section 636(c), reference can be withdrawn by the court only `for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary circumstances shown by any party.'" Dixon v. Yist, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993). This case does not present a situation where a party is simply trying to decide whether to consent to the magistrate judge jurisdiction. See e.g. Anderson v. Woodcreek Venture Ltd., 351 F.3d 911 (2003). Rather, the parties here "consented in writing to conduct all proceedings before the magistrate judge." Dixon, 990 F.2d at 480. Further, neither party has "file[d] a motion for leave to withdraw his consent, nor did [any party] provide any reasons for the withdrawal." Id. Indeed, there "is no absolute right, in a civil case, to withdraw consent to trial and other proceedings before a magistrate judge." Id.
As the Court is not aware of good cause to withdraw the reference to the magistrate judge and neither party has shown extraordinary circumstances to support a withdrawal of consent, the Court finds the acceptance of the withdrawal of consent to have been inappropriate. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED.