Bettencourt v. Parks et al

Filing 87

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 84 Motion for Submission of Meet and Confer Exhibits and Motion for Settlement Conference signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 9/16/2021. (Sant Agata, S)

Case 1:16-cv-00150-DAD-BAM Document 87 Filed 09/16/21 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

GARY RAY BETTENCOURT,

9

Plaintiff,

10

v.

11

Case No. 1:16-cv-00150-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR SUBMISSION OF MEET AND CONFER
EXHIBITS AND MOTION FOR
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

PARKER, et al.,

12

(ECF No. 84)
Defendants.

13
14

Plaintiff Gary Ray Bettencourt (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

15

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on

16

Plaintiff’s claims of deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment against

17

Defendant Crooks for pulling two teeth that did not need to be pulled, and against Defendants

18

Parker and Guzman for filing down six healthy teeth with a dental tool used for drilling cavities.

19

On June 4, 2021, Defendants filed an amended motion to compel Plaintiff to respond to

20

Defendants’ request for admissions and responses to request for production of documents. (ECF

21

No. 74.) The Court directed the parties to meet and confer regarding the discovery dispute and to

22

file a joint statement following the parties’ conference. (ECF No. 76.) Following the meet and

23

confer, Defendants filed a withdrawal of their motion to compel. (ECF No. 81.)

24

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for submission of meet and confer exhibits

25

and a motion for a settlement conference, filed August 6, 2021. (ECF No. 84.) In response to the

26

Court’s order directing Defendants to file a response regarding Plaintiff’s request for a settlement

27

conference, (ECF No. 85), Defendants filed a response on August 30, 2021. (ECF No. 86.)

28

Plaintiff has not filed a reply, and the deadline to do so has expired. The motion is deemed
1

Case 1:16-cv-00150-DAD-BAM Document 87 Filed 09/16/21 Page 2 of 2
1
2

submitted. Local Rule 230(l).
In his motion, Plaintiff requests permission to submit to the Court certain exhibits and

3

documents discussed during the parties’ meet and confer, including dental records and copies of

4

requests Plaintiff apparently submitted requesting further medical records. (ECF No. 84, pp. 7–

5

8.) These documents are attached to Plaintiff’s motion. (Id. at 17–69.) Plaintiff requests, based

6

on these records and his arguments that they provide evidence to support judgment in his favor,

7

that the Court order a settlement conference. (Id.)

8
9

In opposition, Defendants indicate that they do not believe a settlement conference would
be beneficial based upon the significant disparities of the issues between the parties, and their

10

anticipated summary judgment motion on the merits of Plaintiff’s claims. (ECF No. 86.)

11

Defendants state that if their motion for summary judgment is denied, they would be open to

12

reconsidering their position and the potential benefits of a settlement conference. (Id.)

13

Plaintiff’s request is denied. The Court cannot serve as storage for the parties’ evidence,

14

and parties may not file evidence with the Court until the course of litigation brings the evidence

15

into question. Furthermore, based on Defendants’ statement that they do not believe a settlement

16

conference would be beneficial at this time, the Court declines to set this case for a settlement

17

conference. The parties are reminded that they are free to discuss settlement of this matter at any

18

time without judicial involvement by continuing to communicate among themselves. If in the

19

future the parties jointly decide that this action would benefit from a Court-facilitated settlement

20

conference, they may so inform the Court.

21
22

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for submission of meet and confer exhibits and motion for
settlement conference, (ECF No. 84), is HEREBY DENIED.

23
24
25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

September 16, 2021

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
2