Cunningham
Cunningham v. Alameda CountySheriff's Department
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 DAVID TERRELL CUNNINGHAM, Case No. 20-cv-02191-VKD
Plaintiff,
ORDER OF REASSIGNMENT TO
v. DISTRICT JUDGE
ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, et al., 12 Defendants.
13 David Terrell Cunningham, a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Alameda County Sheriff’s Department officers. Dkt. No. 1. Mr. Cunningham has failed to file a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis by June 4, 2020, as the Court directed him to do in its last order granting him an extension of time to do so. Dkt. No. 6. This action is therefore subject to dismissal. Id. All named parties, including unserved defendants, must consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction before a magistrate judge may hear and decide a case. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1); Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 501–04 (9th Cir. 2017) (magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to dismiss…