Baker v. Gipson et al
Filing
79
ORDER denying 69 Motion to Effectuate Settlement signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 8/16/2016. (Lundstrom, T)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ROBERT G. BAKER
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. 1:13-cv-01931-MJS (PC)
ORDER
DENYING
MOTION
EFFECTUATE SETTLEMENT
TO
v.
(ECF No. 69)
CONNIE GIPSON, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
19
rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF Nos. 7 & 10.) The action
20
proceeds against Defendant Kitt on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment inadequate medical
21
care claim. (ECF No. 11.) The matter is set for a settlement conference before
22
Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on August 22, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
23
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s August 1, 2016 motion to effectuate the parties’
24
settlement agreement. (ECF No. 69.) Defendant filed an opposition. (ECF No. 70.)
25
Plaintiff filed no reply. The matter is submitted. Local Rule 230(l).
26
The documents attached to Plaintiff’s motion reflect that the parties are engaged
27
in settlement negotiations. They do not reflect that the parties have reached an
28
agreement.
1
1
2
There being no competent evidence that a settlement agreement has been
reached, Plaintiff’s motion to effectuate a settlement agreement is HEREBY DENIED.
3
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
August 16, 2016
/s/
6
Michael J. Seng
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
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?