Puckett v. Vogel et al

Filing 91

ORDER Setting Settlement Conferece signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 03/10/2016. Settlement Conference set for 5/5/2016 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 6 (MJS) before Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng.(Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DURRELL ANTHONY PUCKETT,

11
12
13

Case No. 1:13-cv-00525-AWI-SKO (PC)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

RONALD VOGEL,

14

Defendant.

15
16

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights

17

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 25, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion for a

18

settlement conference. (Doc. 85.) On March 1, 2016, the Court ordered defendants to notify the

19

Court whether a settlement conference would be beneficial. (Doc. 87.) On March 4, 2016,

20

defendants filed a response indicating they believe a settlement conference would be beneficial.

21

(Doc. 89.) As such, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng to conduct a

22

settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California 93721 in

23

Courtroom #6 on May 5, 2016, at 10:30 a.m.

24
25

A separate order and writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue concurrently with
this order.

26

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

27

1. A settlement conference has been set for May 5, 2016, at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom #6

28

1

1

before Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare

2

Street, Fresno, California 93721.

3

2. Defendants’ lead counsel and a person with full and unlimited authority to negotiate

4

and enter into a binding settlement on defendants’ behalf shall attend the settlement

5

conference in person1.
3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages.

6
7

The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in

8

person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not

9

proceed and will be reset to another date.

10

4. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than April 28,

11

2016, to [e-mail]. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement

12

statement to Sujean Park, ADR & Pro Bono Program Director, USDC CAED, 501 I

13

Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 95814 so it arrives no later than April 28,

14

2016. The envelope shall be marked “Confidential Settlement Statement.” If a party

15

desires to share additional confidential information with the Court, they may do so

16

pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e). Parties are also directed to

17

file a “Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).

18

Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on

19

any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with

20
21
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).
1

2

1

the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.

2

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

3

typed or neatly printed, and include the following:

4

a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.

5

b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon

6

which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of

7

prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in

8

dispute.
c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

9

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and

10

trial.

11
12

e. The relief sought.

13

f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a
history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.

14

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

15

conference.

16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 10, 2016

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3