Calloway v. Veal et al

Filing 181

ORDER for Defendants to Notify Court within Twenty Days whether they Believe a Settlement Conference would be Beneficial signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 09/23/2016. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMISI JERMAINE CALLOWAY,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

1:08-cv-01896-LJO-GSA-PC
ORDER FOR DEFENDANTS TO NOTIFY
COURT WITHIN TWENTY DAYS
WHETHER THEY BELIEVE A
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD
BE BENEFICIAL

vs.
M. VEAL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

I.

BACKGROUND

18

Jamisi Jermaine Calloway (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this

19

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. This case is scheduled for jury trial on January

20

31, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4, before the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill.

21

On September 8, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for the Court to schedule a settlement

22

conference in this action. (ECF Nos. 176, 177.) Plaintiff states that he believes, in good faith,

23

that a settlement in this case is a possibility, and he has offered a reasonable amount to settle

24

this case.

25

II.

SETTLEMENT PROCEEDINGS

26

The Court is able to refer cases for mediation before a participating United States

27

Magistrate Judge. Settlement conferences are ordinarily held in person at the Court or at a

28

prison in the Eastern District of California. Defendants shall notify the Court whether they
1

1

believe, in good faith, that settlement in this case is a possibility and whether they are interested

2

in having a settlement conference scheduled by the Court.1

3

Defendants= counsel shall notify the Court whether there are security concerns that

4

would prohibit scheduling a settlement conference. If security concerns exist, counsel shall

5

notify the Court whether those concerns can be adequately addressed if Plaintiff is transferred

6

for settlement only and then returned to prison for housing.

7

III.

8
9

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty (20) days from

the date of service of this order, Defendants shall file a written response to this order.2

10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 23, 2016

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1

26
27
28

The parties may wish to discuss the issue by telephone in determining whether they believe settlement

is feasible.
2

The issuance of this order does not guarantee referral for settlement, but the Court will make every
reasonable attempt to secure the referral should both parties desire a settlement conference.
2