Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in allowing parties to choose their own magistrate judge and in permitting prospective relief in a prisoner case without finding a specific constitutional violation

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Ninth Circuit—in direct conflict with the Seventh Circuit—erroneously fail to recognize that 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) precludes the parties from selecting a particular magistrate judge to preside over their conflict and that, when they do so, the magistrate judge does not obtain jurisdiction over the matter? 2. Did the Ninth Circuit—contrary to the text of 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A), the purpose of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, and decisions of this Court and other circuit courts—err in holding that a court can order prospective relief in a civil action relating to prison conditions without first finding that the defendant actually violated the prisoner’s federal rights?