Warner v. Cate et al

Filing 121

ORDER Setting Settlement Conference signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 09/16/2016. Settlement Conference set for 11/7/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6 (MJS) before Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EARL WARNER,

12

Case No. 1:12-cv-01146-LJO-MJS (PC)

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

M. CATE, et al.,

15

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Earl Warner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

18

in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The Court has

19

determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference. The Court sets a

20

settlement conference at 10:00 a.m. on Monday, November 7, 2016 in Courtroom #6 at

21

the U.S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California 93721. Notwithstanding

22

the provisions of Local Rule 270(b), judicial expediency dictates that the settlement

23

conference be conducted by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng, the Magistrate Judge to

24

whom this case is assigned. Therefore, the settlement conference will be before

25

Magistrate Judge Seng unless a party requests otherwise in writing within 21 days of the

26

date of this Order.

27

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

28

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Michael
1

1
2

J. Seng on November 7, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. at the U.S. District Court, 2500

3

Tulare Street, Fresno, California 93721 in Courtroom #6.

4

2. Any objections to proceeding before Magistrate Judge Seng must be made in
writing within 21 days of the Court’s Order.

5
6

3. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a
binding settlement on Defendants’ behalf shall attend in person.1

7
8

4. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and

9

damages. The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to

10

this order to appear in person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In

11

addition, the conference will not proceed and will be reset to another date.

12

5. At least 21 days before the settlement conference, Plaintiff SHALL submit to

13

Defendant, by mail, a written itemization of damages and a meaningful

14

settlement demand, which includes a brief explanation of why such a

15

settlement is appropriate, not to exceed ten pages in length. Thereafter, no

16

later than 14 days before the settlement conference, Defendant SHALL

17

respond, by telephone or in person, with an acceptance of the offer or with a

18

meaningful counteroffer, which includes a brief explanation of why such a

19

settlement is appropriate. If settlement is achieved, defense counsel is to

20

immediately inform the Courtroom Deputy of Magistrate Judge Seng.

21
1

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has the
authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement
conferences… .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d
1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2012)(“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in
mandatory settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals
attending the mediation conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at
that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat
Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989), cited with approval in Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F.3d
1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993). The individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion
and authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc.,
216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003), amended on recon. in part, Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 2003 WL
23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement
authority is that the parties’ view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Pitman,
216 F.R.D. at 486. An authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to
comply with the requirement of full authority to settle. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596-97
(8th Cir. 2001).

2

1
2

6. If settlement is not achieved informally, each party is directed to submit

3

confidential settlement statements no later than October 31, 2016 to

4

[e-mail]. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement

5

statement to U.S. District Court, ADR Director, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200,

6

Sacramento, California 95814 so it arrives no later than October 31, 2016. If a

7

party desires to share additional confidential information with the Court, they

8

may do so pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e). Parties are

9

also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement

10

Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).

11
Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor
12
served on any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked
13

“confidential” with the date and time of the settlement conference indicated

14
prominently thereon.
15
16

The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in

17

length, typed or neatly printed, and include the following:

18
a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.
19
b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other
20
grounds upon which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the
21

parties’ likelihood of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a

22
description of the major issues in dispute.
23
c. A summary of the proceedings to date.
24
d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery,
25
pretrial, and trial.
26
e. The relief sought.
27

f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers

28
and a history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.
3

1
g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement

2
3

conference.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 16, 2016

/s/

7

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4