Garcia v. Juarez

Filing 155

ORDER VACATING Minutes Docket Entry 153 . Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 4/25/2017. (Timken, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 ROBERTO M. GARCIA, JR., 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 v. Case No. 1:12-cv-00750-AWI-EPG ORDER VACATING MINUTES DOCKET ENTRY (Doc. 154) MATTHEW M. JUAREZ, JR., et al., 13 14 Defendants. _____________________________________/ 15 16 On April 24, 2017, the undersigned held a settlement conference in this matter. Following 17 this conference, minutes were entered on the docket for this case that state, in pertinent part, this 18 19 20 21 case was “not settled” (the “Minutes”). (Doc. 153.) On the same date, Defendant Juarez filed a Request for Clarification Regarding Judge Oberto’s Minutes Concerning Settlement Conference (the “Request”), in which Defendant Juarez states that the Minutes “might be misinterpreted to suggest that the court was opining on whether or not an enforceable settlement agreement exists.” 22 (Doc. 154.) 23 The undersigned takes no position as to whether an enforceable settlement agreement 24 exists in this case. The undersigned also concurs with Defendant Juarez’s statement that the 25 Minutes may be interpreted as indicating that the undersigned holds a contrary position. 26 // 27 // 28 1 Accordingly, the undersigned VACATES the Minutes. (Doc. 153.) 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: 5 April 25, 2017 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 .

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?