Raymond Arthur Gentile v. U.s. Federal Marshal

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAYMOND ARTHUR GENTILE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
U.S. FEDERAL MARSHAL,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-17018
D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00943-EPG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Erica P. Grosjean, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Raymond Arthur Gentile appeals pro se from the magistrate judge’s order
dismissing his action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of
Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging deliberate
indifference. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo
* 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).
FILED
FEB 23 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-17018
whether the magistrate judge validly entered judgment on behalf of the district
court. Allen v. Meyer, 755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and
remand.
Gentile consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c). The magistrate judge then screened and dismissed Gentile’s action
before the named defendants had been served. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
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-
04 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge’s order and remand for further
proceedings.
VACATED and REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --