JudgeFinder

Ponce v. Santa Clara County

Docket 3:25-cv-07743

Filed
2025-09-11
Terminated
Not recorded
Case type
cv

Outcome

No sourced outcome is recorded. A termination date alone does not establish who prevailed.

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA URIEL PONCE, Case No. 25-cv-07743-AGT (PR) Plaintiff, v. TO REASSIGN THIS ACTION. SANTA CLARA COUNTY, et al., Defendants. All named parties, including unserved defendants, must consent before a magis- trate judge has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) to hear and decide a case. See Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503 (9th Cir. 2017) (magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to dismiss case on initial screening because unserved defendants had not consented to proceed before magistrate judge). It appears that this case requires a decision dispositive of one or more defendants or claims at this time, and consent of all parties has not been obtained. Accordingly, the Clerk shall reassign this case to a district judge pursuant to the Court’s assignment plan. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 31, 2026 ALEX G. TSE United States Magistrate Judge

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.