FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 14 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WILLIE COOLEY, No. 12-17071
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:12-cv-01164-LJO
v.
MEMORANDUM*
C. WOFFORD,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Gary S. Austin, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 10, 2014**
Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Willie Cooley appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we vacate and remand.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
In his order dismissing with prejudice Cooley’s habeas petition, the
magistrate judge incorrectly stated that Cooley had consented to the jurisdiction of
a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Because the record reflects that
Cooley expressly declined to give such consent, the magistrate judge lacked
authority to issue a final order dismissing with prejudice Cooley’s habeas petition.
See 28 U.S.C. § 636; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment and
remand for further proceedings.
In light of this disposition, we do not reach Cooley’s contentions regarding
the merits of his habeas petition.
VACATED and REMANDED.
2 12-17071