Washington v. Biter et al

Filing 22

ORDER CONTINUING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 5/11/2015. Settlement Conference RESET for 7/23/2015 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 10 (GSA) before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES WASHINGTON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01411-MJS (PC)

ORDER CONTINUING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

ANTHONY SWANSON, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

18

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 5, 2015, the case was set for a

19

settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin, to occur on June 4,

20

2015. The Court has learned that plaintiff has a scheduling conflict and is unavailable to

21

participate in a settlement conference on June 4, 2015. Therefore, the settlement

22

conference in this case will be continued to July 23, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. before

23

Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno,

24

California 93721 in Courtroom #10.

25
26

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

27

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

28

1. The settlement conference currently set in this case for June 4, 2015 is
1

1
2

continued to July 23, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Gary S.

3

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

4

in Courtroom #10.

5

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

6
7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

4. The parties are directed to submit their confidential settlement conference

12

statements

13

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

14

statement addressed to Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin, USDC CAED, 2500

15

Tulare Street, Room 1501, Fresno, CA 93721. The envelope shall be marked

16

“Confidential Settlement Statement.”

17

confidential information with the court, they may do so pursuant to the

18

provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e).

19

settlement statements, each party shall file on the docket a “Notice of

20

Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement.”

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

to

the

court

using

1

the

following

email

address:

If a party desires to share additional

Upon submission of confidential

Statements are due at

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. Pittman 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

least 7 days prior to the settlement conference.

3
4

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

5

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

6

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

7

prominently thereon.

8
9

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

10

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

11
12

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

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

description of the major issues in dispute.

17

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

18

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

19

pretrial, and trial.

20

e. The relief sought.

21

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

22

and a history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.
g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement

23
24

conference.

25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 11, 2015

/s/

28

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4