Baker v. Gipson et al

Filing 66

ORDER GRANTING 65 Motion for Settlement Conference and ORDER Extending Deadlines for Filing Pretrial Statements signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 7/22/2016. Settlement Conference set for 8/22/2016 at 09:00 AM in Bakersfield at 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

ROBERT G. BAKER,

10
11

Case No. 1:13-cv-01931-MJS (PC)

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

v.
(ECF No. 65)

12
13

CONNIE GIPSON, et al.,
Defendants.

14

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINES FOR
FILING PRETRIAL STATEMENTS

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983.

He has requested a settlement conference before a Magistrate

Judge. (ECF No. 65.)
Upon review, the court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement
conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer L.
Thurston to conduct a settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 510 19th Street,
Bakersfield, California 93301 on August 22, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.
A separate order and writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue
concurrently with this order.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s request for a settlement conference is GRANTED.
2. A settlement conference has been set for August 22, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. before
1

1

Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston at the U. S. District Court, 510 19th

2

Street, Bakersfield, California 93301.
3. The deadlines for filing pretrial statements, set out in the Court’s June 28,

3

2016 Second Scheduling Order, are hereby extended as follows:

4

a. Plaintiff shall file and serve a pretrial statement on or before August 29,

5

2016.

6

b. Defendant shall file and serve a pretrial statement on or before

7

September 12, 2016.

8

4. Parties are instructed to have a principal with full settlement authority present

9
10

at the Settlement Conference or to be fully authorized to settle the matter on

11

any terms. The individual with full authority to settle must also have

12

“unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of the

13

party, if appropriate. The purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person

14

with full settlement authority is that the parties’ view of the case may be altered

15

during the face to face conference. An authorization to settle for a limited

16

dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to comply with the requirement

17

of full authority to settle1.

18

5. Defendant shall provide a confidential settlement statement to the following

19

email address: [e-mail] not later than August 15, 2016.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

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, 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

Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement statement to Sujean Park, ADR

2

Division, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 95814 so it arrives

3

no later than August 15, 2016. The envelope shall be marked

4

“CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT.” If a party

5

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

6

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

7

directed to file a “Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement”

8

(See L.R. 270(d)).

9
10

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

11

served on any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked

12

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

13

prominently thereon.

14
15

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

16

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

17

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

18

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

19

grounds upon which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the

20

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

21

description of the major issues in dispute.

22

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

23

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

24

pretrial, and trial.

25

e. The relief sought.

26

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

27
28

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

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

1

conference.

2
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 22, 2016

/s/

6

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Michael J. Seng

4