Reyes v. Flores et al

Filing 156

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND PARAMETERS AND SCHEDULING PRE-CONFERENCE TELEPHONIC DISCUSSION. Pre-Settlement Conference set for 1/6/2023 at 10:30 AM, Settlement Conference set for 1/13/2023 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta. Settlement statements due 12/30/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta on 11/9/2022. (Apodaca, P)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ABEL REYES 12 Case No. 1:16-cv-00586-CDB Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 FLORES ET AL., 15 Defendants. 16 17 ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND PARAMETERS AND SCHEDULING PRE-CONFERENCE TELEPHONIC DISCUSSION Settlement Statements due: December 30, 2022 Pre-Settlement Conference: January 6, 2023 Settlement Conference: January 13, 2023 18 19 20 21 Magistrate Judge Helena Barch-Kuchta will hold a settlement conference on January 13, 22 2023, at 10:30 a.m. Unless the parties request the conference to be in-person, the Court will 23 conduct the settlement conference via video conference. 24 invitation will be distributed the week prior.1 The court has reserved the entire day for this 25 settlement conference and expects the parties will proceed with the settlement conference in good 26 27 28 1 The Zoom settlement conference Any difficulties concerning Zoom video conference, or connecting to the Zoom video conference, shall immediately be reported to Patricia Apodaca, Courtroom Deputy for the Hon. Helena BarchKuchta, United States Magistrate Judge, at papodaca@caed.uscourts.gov. 1 faith and attempt to resolve all or part of the case. If any party believes that the settlement 2 conference will not be productive, that party shall so inform the court as far in advance of the 3 settlement conference as possible. 4 Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the court, the following individuals must attend 5 the settlement conference in person: (1) all of the attorney(s) who will try the case; and (2) 6 individuals with full authority to negotiate and settle the case, on any terms. See Local Rule 270(f). 7 Whether one or more of the named defendants’ attendance will be required will be discussed at 8 the January 6, 2023, Pre-Settlement Telephone Conference. 9 No later than December 30, 2022, each party must submit to Judge Barch-Kuchta’s 10 chambers at hbkorders@caed.uscourts.gov or by mail at U.S. District Court, P.O. Box 575, 11 Yosemite National Park, CA 95389, a settlement conference statement. These statements should 12 neither be filed on the docket nor served on any other party. 13 In compliance with Local Rule 270(d)-(e), the settlement statements will be used 14 exclusively for the undersigned to prepare for and conduct the settlement conference. They will 15 not become part of the case file and will be shred thereafter under Local Rule 270(e). If applicable, 16 the statements should be marked “CONFIDENTIAL.” See Local Rule 270(d). The statements should not exceed ten (10) pages and should include: 17 (1) a brief recitation of the facts; 18 (2) a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the case, including the parties’ relevant 19 20 21 position on the factual and legal issues and brief review of the evidence to support the parties’ factual position; (3) an itemized estimate of the expected costs for further discovery, pretrial, and trial 22 23 matters, in specific dollar terms; (4) your best estimate of the probability that plaintiff will prevail should this case proceed 24 to trial; 25 (5) your best estimate of the damages or relief plaintiff may recover should this case proceed 26 to trial and plaintiff prevail (in specific dollar terms and/or injunctive relief, if applicable); 27 (6) a history of settlement discussions (including a listing of any current settlement offers 28 2 1 from any party, in specific dollar terms), a candid statement of your party’s current position on 2 settlement, including the amount that you will give/accept to settle (in specific dollar terms), and 3 a statement of your expectations for settlement discussions; (7) a list of the individuals who will be attending the settlement on the party’s behalf, 4 5 including names and, if appropriate, titles. 6 At the outset of the settlement conference, the undersigned may call upon the parties’ 7 counsel to give a brief (five-minute) opening presentation outlining the factual and legal highlights 8 of their case before the parties break into separate caucuses. The undersigned reserves the right to 9 dispense with the opening presentations of counsel if the undersigned determines that such 10 presentations are not likely to be productive. 11 Notwithstanding the provisions of Federal Rule of Evidence 408, all statements made by 12 the parties relating to the substance or merits of the case, whether written or oral, made for the first 13 time during the settlement conference will be deemed to be confidential and shall not be admissible 14 in evidence for any reason in the trial of the case, should the case not settle. This provision does 15 not preclude admissibility in other contexts, such as pertaining to a motion for sanctions regarding 16 the settlement conference. Judge Barch-Kuchta will hold a short, pre-settlement conference telephone discussion on 17 18 19 20 21 22 January 6, 2023 at 10:30 a.m. (dial-in number: 1-888-204-5984; passcode: 4446176). Only the lead attorney from each side2 should participate. At Judge Barch-Kuchta’s discretion, the joint telephonic discussion may be followed by private telephonic discussions between the judge and each party. Dated: November 9, 2022 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 2 28 The Court expects that the attorneys participating in the telephone discussion will also participate in the settlement conference. 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

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?