Glass v. Woodford et al

Filing 110

ORDER REQUIRING Parties to Notify Court Whether a Settlement Conference Would Be Beneficial TWENTY-DAY DEADLINE, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 9/25/12. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

DONALD GLASS,

10

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00098-AWI-BAM PC
Plaintiff,

11

v.

12

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO NOTIFY
COURT WHETHER A SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL

R. FIELDS, et al.,

13

TWENTY-DAY DEADLINE
Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Donald Glass (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

16

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on the

17

complaint, filed January 5, 2009, against Defendants Hamilton, Robles, Logue, and Bautista for

18

excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; Defendants Riddle, and McDaniel for

19

deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and Defendants Hamilton, Bautista,

20

Logue, Robles, Riddle, Cedillos, and McDaniel for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment.

21

This matter is set for trial on April 15, 2013.

22

The Court is able to refer cases for mediation before a United States Magistrate Judge. A

23

settlement conference will only be set if the parties are willing to make a meaningful attempt to

24

resolve this action and are willing to compromise. Settlement conferences may be held by video

25

conference or in person at the court. Plaintiff and Defendants shall notify the Court whether they

26

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

27

///

28

///
1

1

having a settlement conference scheduled by the Court.1

2

If the parties wish to have a settlement conference scheduled, Defendants’ counsel shall

3

notify the Court whether there are security concerns that would prohibit scheduling a settlement

4

conference. If security concerns exist, counsel shall notify the Court whether those concerns can be

5

adequately addressed if Plaintiff is transferred for settlement only and then returned to prison for

6

housing.

7

Accordingly, within twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff and

8

Defendants shall file a written response to this order. If a settlement conference is set by the Court,

9

th Court will issue a separate order indicating each of the parties’ responsibilities regarding the

10

settlement conference.

11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
cm411

September 25, 2012

/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1

28

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

feasible.

2