Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Anthony Tyrone Campbell, Sr. v. P. Dickey, former Corrections Officer
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 24-1420 · judgment September 24, 2025
Questions presented
-
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit consequently overlook Federal Law pertaining to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), where, petitioner did not consent to a magistrate judge?
-
Did the United States District Court for Eastern District of California violate Federal Law under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) when it adopted a Finding and Recommendations generated by a magistrate judge without petitioner’s consent?
-
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit adversely overlook the decision of another Chief District Judge, namely, the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill? (See: Campbell v. Dickey, 2018 WL 4057266)
-
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit consequently generate an excessive filing fee upon petitioner in the amount of $605.00, after generating its initial filing fee of $505.00? (See: Exhibit A)
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Anthony Tyrone Campbell Sr.
For respondent
Martha Patterson Ehlenbach
California Office of the Attorney General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Apr 20 2026The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
- Mar 26 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2026.
- Mar 18 2026Waiver of right of respondent Dickey, Officer to respond filed.
- Feb 18 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 1, 2026)