Ivory v. Tilton, et al.

Filing 121

ORDER REQUIRING Parties to Notify Court whether a Settlement Conference would be Beneficial; Thirty Day Deadline signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/27/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

NORMAN IVORY,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
C/O MERAZ,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
____________________________________)

1:09-cv-01272-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO
NOTIFY COURT WHETHER A
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD
BE BENEFICIAL
THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

17

Norman Ivory ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

18

with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint

19

commencing this action on July 20, 2009. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds on the original

20

Complaint, against defendant Correctional Officer Meraz (“Defendant”) for use of excessive

21

force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Id.)

22

The deadlines established by the Court for discovery and filing pretrial dispositive

23

motions have expired, (Docs. 45, 81, 97), and Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was

24

denied on March 26, 2013, (Doc. 120). No other motions are pending. At this stage of the

25

proceedings, the Court ordinarily proceeds to schedule the case for trial.

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. Plaintiff and Defendant shall notify the Court
1

1

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

2

are interested in having a settlement conference scheduled by the Court.1

3

Defendant’s 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

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) days from

8

the date of service of this order, Plaintiff and Defendant shall file a written response to this

9

order.2

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

Dated:

March 27, 2013

/s/ Gary S. Austin

15

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

16

6i0kij8d

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

1

The parties may wish to discuss the issue by telephone in determining whether they believe settlement is
feasible.
2

28

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