28 U.S.C. § 635

Expenses

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Full-time United States magistrate judges serving under this chapter shall be allowed their actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties, including the compensation of such legal assistants as the Judicial Conference, on the basis of the recommendations of the judicial councils of the circuits, considers necessary, and the compensation of necessary clerical and secretarial assistance. Such expenses and compensation shall be determined and paid by the Director under such regulations as the Director shall prescribe with the approval of the conference. The Administrator of General Services shall provide such magistrate judges with necessary courtrooms, office space, furniture and facilities within United States courthouses or office buildings owned or occupied by departments or agencies of the United States, or should suitable courtroom and office space not be available within any such courthouse or office building, the Administrator of General Services, at the request of the Director, shall procure and pay for suitable courtroom and office space, furniture and facilities for such magistrate judge in another building, but only if such request has been approved as necessary by the judicial council of the appropriate circuit.(b) Under such regulations as the Director shall prescribe with the approval of the conference, the Director shall reimburse part-time magistrate judges for actual expenses necessarily incurred by them in the performance of their duties under this chapter. Such reimbursement may be made, at rates not exceeding those prescribed by such regulations, for expenses incurred by such part-time magistrate judges for clerical and secretarial assistance, stationery, telephone and other communications services, travel, and such other expenses as may be determined to be necessary for the proper performance of the duties of such officers: Provided, however, That no reimbursement shall be made for all or any portion of the expense incurred by such part-time magistrate judges for the procurement of office space.(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 917; Pub. L. 90–578, title I, § 101, Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1112; Pub. L. 96–82, § 8(a), Oct. 10, 1979, 93 Stat. 646; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, § 321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)Historical and Revision Notes

Prior section 663.—Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§ 597, 597a, 597b, 597c (May 28, 1896, ch. 252, §§ 21, 24, 29 Stat. 184, 186; Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 721, §§ 1–4, 60 Stat. 752, 753).

The provision of section 597c of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., excepting commissioners in the Territory of Alaska was omitted as unnecessary since this exception is implicit in the revised section. The words “in each judicial district” limit the section to the commissioners in the districts enumerated in chapter 5 which includes Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and District of Columbia but omits Alaska, Canal Zone, [Guam] and Virgin Islands.

Salaries of park commissioners are provided by section 634 of this title.

Changes were made in phraseology.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1979—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 96–82 inserted reference to the compensation of such legal assistants as the Judicial Conference, on the basis of the recommendations of the judicial councils of the circuits, considers necessary.

1968—Pub. L. 90–578 substituted provisions relating to expenses for provisions prescribing residence for park commissioners. See section 631(b)(3) of this title.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesChange of Name

Words “magistrate judges” and “magistrate judge” substituted for “magistrates” and “magistrate”, respectively, wherever appearing in text pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of this title.

Effective Date of 1968 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 90–578 effective Oct. 17, 1968, except when a later effective date is applicable, which is the earlier of date when implementation of amendment by appointment of magistrates [now United States magistrate judges] and assumption of office takes place or third anniversary of enactment of Pub. L. 90–578 on Oct. 17, 1968, see section 403 of Pub. L. 90–578, set out as a note under section 631 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 137 cases (107 in the last 5 years), 1929–2026 · leading case: United States v. Zenon

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Zenon (2003) prd · cites it 3× “This grant of jurisdiction is reiterated in 28 U.S.C. § 635 (a): “Each United States magistrate serving under this chapter shall have within the territorial jurisdiction prescribed by his appointment.”

Greenier v. PACE, LOCAL NO. 1188 (2002) med “See 28 U.S.C. § 635 (b)(1)(A). Therefore, the Court affirms the March 7 Order.”

Villarreal v. Colvin (2016) txwd “145 Additionally, a party’s failure to file timely written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report will bar the aggrieved party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual…”

McGlynn v. Huston (2010) lamd “Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 635 (b)(1), Huston had ten (10) days within which to file objections to the undersigned’s November 6, 2009 report.”

United States v. Arraiza Navas (2002) prd · cites it 3× “This grant of jurisdiction is reiterated in 28 U.S.C. § 635 (a): “Each United States magistrate serving under this chapter shall have within the territorial jurisdiction prescribed by his appointment.”

British International Insurance v. Seguros La Republica, S.A. (2000) txwd “28 U.S.C. § 635 (b)(1). No objections to the Memorandum and Recommendation have been filed.”

Middleton v. Hartford Acc. & Indemnity Co. (1941) ca5 “88 , 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 635 , 639-641, 644, authorized it, and Sect.”

CLOUD FOUNDATION, INC. v. Kempthorne (2008) mtd “28 U.S.C. § 635 (b)(1). After such a review, the Court concludes Plaintiffs’ objections are not well-taken.”

Graffis v. Woodward (1938) ca7 “Code, [ 28 U.S.C.A. § 635 ] prescribing the mode of proof in the trial of actions at common law.”

Globe Indemnity Co. v. Banner Grain Co. (1937) ca8 “It seems very clear that counsel for the Employer proceeded on the belief that the Clark record contained evidence relevant to this issue of accident and that the Clark record was in evidence by consent.”

In Re Vivendi Universal, Sa Securities Litig. (2009) nysd · cites it 2× “(E & Y-U.S. Br. at 1-2.) ANALYSIS Review of a magistrate judge's decision depends on whether the matter at issue is a dispositive or non-dispositive matter under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 72 and 28 U.”

Gimenes v. New York & Porto Rico S. S. Co. (1929) nysd “” The other methods covered by this proviso are contained in subsequent sections of title 28 of the United States Code which make provision for the taking of testimony by deposition de bene esse, for taking of testimony under commission on a dedimus potestatem, and for the…”

Show all 137 citing cases →

— 28 U.S.C. § 635(c) — 1 case

Phillips v. Babbitt, Sec (1998) ca4

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.