Shepard v. Tilton et al

Filing 83

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 69 74 Motions for Settlement Conference without Prejudice signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 2/21/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

LAMONT SHEPARD,

10

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00023-BAM PC

Plaintiff,

11

v.

12

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS
FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

R. PEREZ, et al.,

13

(ECF Nos. 69, 74)
Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Lamont Shepard (“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

17

Plaintiff’s complaint Defendants L.A. Martinez, R. Perez, P. Garcia, J. Soto, E. De la Cruz and A

18

Trevino for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. A telephonic trial confirmation

19

hearing is set for March 15, 2013, and a jury trial is set for May 6, 2013.

20

On November 29, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a settlement conference. (ECF

21

No. 69.) Defendants did not respond. On January 28, 2013, Plaintiff filed a second motion

22

requesting a settlement conference. (ECF No. 74.) On January 30, 2013, the Court ordered

23

Defendants to respond to Plaintiff’s motions and notify the Court whether they believed, in good

24

faith, that settlement in this case was a possibility and whether they were interested in having a

25

settlement conference scheduled by the Court.

26

On February 13, 2013, Defendants filed a response stating that they were willing to make a

27

meaningful attempt to resolve this case, but did not believe that a settlement was possible because

28

of Plaintiff’s expectations about the worth of his case. (ECF No. 80.) Defendants also indicated that
1

1

Plaintiff owes more than $5,000 in restitution, but they are unlikely to offer to settle this case for

2

more than $5,000, which makes settlement highly unlikely.

3

The Court declines to schedule a settlement conference at this time. No settlement

4

conference will be scheduled until such time as both parties agree that settlement in the action is

5

possible. Should both parties be willing to participate in a settlement conference in a good faith

6

effort to settle this action, they may file a joint request for a settlement conference. Plaintiff’s

7

motions for a settlement conference are HEREBY DENIED without prejudice.

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
10c20k

February 21, 2013

/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2