MICHAEL WILLIAMS V. SANJEEV BATRA, No. 17-15530 (9th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 25 2018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MICHAEL B. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 17-15530 D.C. No. 1:16-cv-01940-MJS v. MEMORANDUM* SANJEEV BATRA, Doctor at Coalinga State Hospital, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Michael J. Seng, Magistrate Judge, Presiding Submitted January 16, 2017** Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Michael B. Williams, a civil detainee under California’s Sexually Violent Predators Act, appeals pro se from the magistrate judge’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge validly * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). entered judgment on behalf of the district court. Allen v. Meyer, 755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand. Williams consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The magistrate judge then screened and dismissed Williams’s action before the named defendant had been served. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 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, 50304 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge’s order and remand for further proceedings. To the extent that Williams requests appointment of counsel on remand (Docket Entry No. 4), the request is denied without prejudice to Williams requesting appointment of counsel by the district court. Williams’s request that his pending appeals, Case Nos. 17-15530, 17-15834, and 17-16790, be assigned to the same merits panel (Docket Entry No. 4) is granted. VACATED and REMANDED. 2 17-15530

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.