Lamon v. Amrheign et al

Filing 113

ORDER Regarding Plaintiff's 108 Motion Concerning Terms of Settlement signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 01/25/2018. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

BARRY LOUIS LAMON,

9

Plaintiff,

10
11
12

v.
B. AMRHEIGN, et al.,

Case No. 1:12-cv-00296-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION CONCERNING TERMS OF
SETTLEMENT
(ECF No. 108)

Defendants.

13
14
15
16
17

Plaintiff Barry Louis Lamon is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On November 17, 2017 a settlement conference was held in this matter before Magistrate

18

Judge Michael J. Seng, at which this case settled. (ECF No. 104.) On November 20, 2017,

19

defense counsel filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice signed by all parties. (ECF Nos.

20

105.) On November 27, 2017, all parties having stipulated to a dismissal with prejudice, this case

21

was closed. (ECF No. 107).

22

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion regarding the terms of the settlement, filed

23

on December 1, 2017. (ECF No. 108.) Plaintiff states in the motion that as part of the settlement

24

terms, he was to be issued a JWIN-brand boombox radio with an AM/FM/CD/cassette player. He

25

further states that although he was issued the boombox, only the radio portion is functioning, and

26

the CD and cassette-playing functions do not work. Plaintiff submits documentation in support.

27

Plaintiff argues that as a result of the improperly functioning boombox, the terms of the

28

settlement have not been fulfilled, and he seeks an order of the Court regarding a replacement.

1

On December 8, 2017, the Court ordered Defendants to respond to Plaintiff’s motion.

2

(ECF No. 109.) On December 22, 2017, Defendants sought a fourteen-day extension of time to

3

work out issues with institutional staff regarding this matter, (ECF No. 110), which was granted,

4

(ECF No. 111).

5

On January 8, 2018, Defendants filed a response to Plaintiff’s motion. (ECF No. 112.) The

6

time for any reply has passed, and none has been filed. Accordingly, the motion is deemed

7

submitted. Local Rule 230(l).

8

Defendants respond, with a declaration of counsel in support, that the litigation

9

coordinator was contacted regarding the boombox issue that Plaintiff has raised. The litigation

10

coordinator informed defense counsel that staff had located a Sony radio and CD player that

11

Plaintiff would need to inspect and agree to accept as a replacement. Counsel was later informed

12

that on December 26, 2017, Plaintiff inspected and accepted the replacement to fulfill that portion

13

of the settlement terms. A true and correct copy of an addendum and release indicating that the

14

replacement was accepted, which is signed and dated by Plaintiff, is attached as an exhibit. (ECF

15

No. 112-1, at p. 2.)

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff has not disputed any of these representations or otherwise shown any relief is due
here. Thus, this matter is resolved without further need for Court intervention.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion seeking an order regarding the settlement terms in this
action, filed on December 1, 2017 (ECF No. 108), is denied.

20
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

January 25, 2018

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2