Kuerbitz v. Bouchard ( 2024 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ARNOLD KUERBITZ, Plaintiff, Case No. 24-cv-10774 v. Hon. Matthew F. Leitman MICHAEL J. BOUCHARD, et al., Defendants. __________________________________________________________________/ ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR OBJECTION TO ASSIGNMENT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DEMAND FOR TRIAL JUDGE (ECF No. 14) Plaintiff Arnold Kuerbitz has filed this pro se action against Defendants Michael Bouchard, Oakland County Sheriff, and Karen McDonald, Oakland County prosecutor. On May 6, 2024, the Court entered an order referring all pretrial matters to United States Magistrate Judge Anthony Patti. (See Order, ECF No. 13). The Court made the referral pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1), which authorizes magistrate judges to “hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before the court” (aside from certain specifically delineated dispositive motions not at issue here), conduct hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition by the district judge. Plaintiff now objects to the referral. He cites no authority suggesting that the referral violates any statute, rule, or constitutional provision. And it does not. See United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 680 (1980) (finding due process rights adequately protected by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) because the district judge has broad discretion to “accept, reject, or modify the magistrate’s proposed finding” and is the “ultimate decisionmaker”). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: September 26, 2024 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on September 26, 2024, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Ryan Case Manager (313) 234-5126