Rule 73 Consent FAQ - Judge Robertson
Frequently Asked Questions About Consenting to United States Magistrate Judge Robertson Under Rule 73
Why is my case assigned to a U.S. Magistrate Judge?
In the Eastern District of Oklahoma, all civil cases are initially assigned to a United States Magistrate Judge. This assignment structure is a direct response to the overwhelming volume of criminal cases now handled by District Judges following the Supreme Court’s decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020). That ruling dramatically expanded federal jurisdiction over criminal matters in Indian Country, which includes much of eastern Oklahoma. As a result, District Judges must prioritize felony dockets, grand juries, and speedy trial obligations—making it difficult to guarantee timely attention to civil trials. To ensure civil litigants still have meaningful and efficient access to federal court, Magistrate Judges in this District play a central role in managing and resolving civil cases.
What does it mean to consent to a Magistrate Judge under Rule 73?
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, parties in a civil case may voluntarily agree to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in their case—including dispositive motions, jury or bench trial, and entry of final judgment. This route offers the same procedural protections and appeal rights as a District Judge.
Why should I consent to a Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Oklahoma?
The primary benefit is speed and certainty. In the Eastern District of Oklahoma, Magistrate Judges provide:
- A “first-up” trial setting, meaning your case is prioritized on the civil trial docket;
- Firm trial dates that are far less likely to be continued;
- Expedited rulings on pretrial motions and case management issues;
- Continuity—the same judge handles your case from start to finish;
- Greater flexibility and input in setting discovery timelines, allowing the parties to shape a schedule that meets their needs without unnecessary delay.
Due to constitutional and statutory obligations like the Speedy Trial Act, criminal cases must take precedence on the calendars of District Judges. As a result, civil trials are frequently delayed, often more than once. By consenting to a Magistrate Judge, parties avoid these delays and secure a direct path to timely resolution.
Is consenting to a Magistrate Judge a smart move for my case?
Yes—many litigants view it as a strategic advantage. Consenting under Rule 73 is a proactive decision chosen by parties who value:
- Judicial efficiency and faster case progression;
- Certainty in trial scheduling without the risk of criminal docket delays;
- Consistent judicial oversight through every phase of litigation.
This is not a compromise—it’s an opportunity. Parties ranging from private litigants to large institutions routinely consent because they understand that momentum and resolution matter. You’ll receive the same legal standards, the same appellate rights, and the same rigorous process—without the wait.
Will I still get a fair trial and the right to appeal?
Yes. Magistrate Judges follow the same Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence, and apply the same substantive law as District Judges. Final judgments issued by a Magistrate Judge under Rule 73 are appealed directly to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, just like decisions from a District Judge.
Do both parties have to agree?
Yes. Consent must be mutual and voluntary. All parties must file a joint consent form, and it remains confidential unless and until all sides agree. The assigned judges are not informed of the decision unless full consent is given by all litigants.
How do I consent?
You’ll receive a Notice of Availability of a United States Magistrate Judge after your case is filed. To proceed, you can:
- File the Consent to Jurisdiction by a U.S. Magistrate Judge form through CM/ECF; or
- Indicate consent in the Joint Status Report, provided it is signed by all parties.
Judge Robertson’s Joint Status Report form includes a designated consent section and can be accessed directly from his judicial profile page.
Can I view Judge Robertson’s civil trial schedule before deciding?
Yes. One of the key benefits of consenting to Judge Robertson is calendar transparency. His full civil trial schedules for 2025 and 2026 are publicly available, so that parties can see exactly when trial slots are open and how quickly their case can be set.
What is a Rule 73 Conference?
When Judge Robertson took the bench in 2022, he implemented Rule 73 Conferences as part of his standard civil case management procedures. These informal, on-the-record conferences are conducted early in the case and are designed to provide full transparency to the parties about the consent process under Rule 73.
At a Rule 73 Conference:
- The Court explains the benefits and advantages of consenting to a U.S. Magistrate Judge, including trial priority, calendar control, and early resolution;
- Parties have the opportunity to ask procedural questions about how consent works, what it means, and how it affects appellate rights;
- The Judge remains neutral and respectful of each party’s decision, and consent remains entirely voluntary and confidential unless given by all parties.
The goal is simple: to ensure every litigant and attorney makes an informed decision, with clarity, confidence, and no pressure.
Rule 73 Conferences are part of Judge Robertson’s commitment to judicial transparency, calendar certainty, and access to timely civil justice in the Eastern District of Oklahoma.
Is the Rule 73 Conference mandatory?
Yes, a Rule 73 Conference is scheduled in all civil cases assigned to Judge Robertson, typically during early case management. However, there is no obligation to consent. The purpose of the conference is purely informational—to ensure all parties understand their options and can make an informed choice about how to proceed.
For the convenience of litigants and counsel, Judge Robertson conducts these initial Rule 73 Conferences by Zoom, allowing full participation without requiring travel to the courthouse.
Final Thought
In the Eastern District of Oklahoma, Rule 73 consent means priority, speed, and finality. It’s a choice many litigants make not out of necessity—but out of wisdom. If you want your civil case heard and resolved without delay, this path is ready when you are.