Please refer to Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(2), “a judge may designate a magistrate to serve as a special master in any civil case, upon consent of the parties, without regard to the provisions of Rule 53 (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the U.S. district courts.”  This statute, however, does NOT authorize a magistrate to enter final judgment.  E.g., Kendall v. Davis 569 F.2d 1330 (5 th Cir. 1978).

Under Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(3), a “magistrate may be assigned such additional duties as are not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.” Findings by a magistrate made pursuant to this provision are NOT final, but “are subject to de novo determination by the district court judge.”  Calderon v. Waco Lighthouse for the Blind, 630 F.2d 352, 355, n.3 (5 th Cir4. 1980).”

(I do not know if the court. customarily, mailed the appropriate forms to Williamson when he originally filed his complaint.  As you, they were never mailed to me..  If he was, and he completed the forms, signed and dated and returned the forms to the court, the court may say that he consented to allow a magistrate judge to make the final ruling.  As a pro se litigant, he should object vehemently to this argument, using Rule 53 (b) of the FRCP and all the cases included with this e-mail..

Other good cases to cite are Glover v. Alabama Dept. of Correction,  660 F. 2d 120, 122 (5 th Cir. Unit B Oct. 1981).  Furthermore , the magistrate judge's order is not final.  See Title 28 U.S.C.§ 636 (b),(c) & § 1291; and Perez-Prego v. Alachua County Clerk of Court, 148 F. 3d 1272, 1273 (11 th Cir. 1998).

The Court states, “ An Appeal is not lost if a mistake is made in designating the judgment appealed from where it is clear that the overriding intent was effectively to appeal.”  Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Master, 701 F. 2d 1365, 1368 (11 th Cir. 1983).

[Plaintiff’s emphasis in bold in all these references].

These cases and Sections mentioned from Title 28 clearly invalidate the magistrate judge's order.   A magistrate judge is referred a case from the district court judge who was originally assigned the case when the case was filed.  The magistrate has the authority to make a written recommendation to the district court judge who has the authority to sign a final order.  If a district court judge did not sign the final order for Williamson's case, the case is NOT final, and Williamson should quickly file a Motion for a de novo Determination.  Without a final order signed by a district court judge, if he wants to timely appeal the decision to the USCA, his appeal will be dismissed sua sponge for lack of jurisdiction because his case is really NOT final. Remember, it took me MONTHS to figure out why the appeals court kept saying the case was not final…..I didn't know the rules and the case laws, etc.

There is a time frame for each court document. Because he is a pro se litigant, the court should give him some latitude if he is late; a lawyer would not receive the same latitude. If he is late, he will have to make a motion to the court asking for an enlargement of time and explaining why he needs the extra time. He is pro se; he lacks legal skills, etc., you know what to tell him much better than me.

THE WRITTEN JUDICAL/CONGRESSIONAL LAWS AND THE CASE LAWS (PRIOR CASES WHICH HAVE BEEN WRITTEN UP AND NOT REVERSED) ARE ALL ON OUR SIDE……BUT HE WILL LEARN, IF HE DOES NOT ALREADY KNOW, THAT ALL OF THAT MEANS NOTHING.  MY EXPERIENCE DURING THE LAST YEAR WITH OUR COURT SYSTEM HAS BEEN A VERY RUDE AWAKENING.  I ALREADY KNEW THE IRS WAS CORRUPT, BUT I HONESTLY WAS SURPRISED AND SHOCKED TO WITNESS, IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE, OUR COURT SYSTEM LOOK THE OTHER WAY, COMPLETELY IGNORING NONFEASANCE BY COURT EMPLOYEES, AS WELL AS OFFICERS OF THE COURT, AND WORSE.