Banerjee v. Brady et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
EASTERN DIVISION
Joyanta Banerjee, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	) 	ORDER ADOPTING ORDER
) 	AND RECOMMENDATION
vs. 	)
) 	Case No. 3:23-cv-93
Reid Brady, East Central Judicial District, 	)
and State of North Dakota, 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
______________________________________________________________________________
Before the Court is an order and recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Alice
R. Senechal. Doc. No. 15. Judge Senechal denied Plaintiff Joyanta Banerjee’s request to withdraw
his consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction and found as moot the appeal to the chief district judge.
Id.
The Court has reviewed the order and recommendation de novo, the relevant case law, and
the entire record, and finds the order and recommendation to be persuasive and legally correct.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(4), extraordinary circumstances are required to withdraw consent to
magistrate judge jurisdiction. Here, it appears that Banerjee’s request to withdraw jurisdiction is
primarily based on disagreements with the Court’s decisions. But adverse rulings do not constitute
a basis for withdrawing magistrate judge jurisdiction. See Mello v. Unum Corp., No. 4:13CV2543,
2014 WL 360610, at *1 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 3, 2014). Given that, the Court ADOPTS the order and
recommendation (Doc. No. 15) in its entirety and agrees with the decision to DENY Banerjee’s
1
Case 3:23-cv-00093-ARS Document 17 Filed 07/07/23 Page 1 of 2

request to withdraw magistrate judge jurisdiction and FIND AS MOOT his appeal to the chief
district judge.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 7th day of July, 2023.
/s/ Peter D. Welte
Peter D. Welte, Chief Judge
United States District Court
2
Case 3:23-cv-00093-ARS Document 17 Filed 07/07/23 Page 2 of 2