Singleton v. Fortune et al

Filing 60

ORDER REQUIRING Plaintiff and Defendant to Notify Court Whether a Settlement Conference Would be Beneficial, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/29/18. Twenty-One Day Deadline. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LAMAR SINGLETON, SR.,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
DR. FORTUNE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

1:17-cv-00124-DAD-GSA-PC
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF AND
DEFENDANT TO NOTIFY COURT
WHETHER A SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL
TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

16
17
18

I.

Lamar Singleton, Sr., (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

19
20
21
22

pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds
with the First Amended Complaint filed on February 19, 2016, against defendant Fortune
(“Defendant”) on Plaintiff’s medical claim pursuant to the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 25.)
On January 22, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting the court to schedule a

23
24
25
26
27
28

BACKGROUND

settlement conference in this case. (ECF No. 56.)
II.

SETTLEMENT PROCEEDINGS
The court is able to refer cases for mediation before a participating United States

Magistrate Judge. Settlement conferences are ordinarily held in person at the court or at a
prison in the Eastern District of California. Plaintiff and Defendant Fortune shall notify the
1

1

court whether they believe, in good faith, that settlement in this case is a possibility and

2

whether they are interested in having a settlement conference scheduled by the court.1

3

Defendant’s counsel shall notify the court whether there are security concerns that

4

would prohibit scheduling a settlement conference. If security concerns exist, counsel shall

5

notify the court whether those concerns can be adequately addressed if Plaintiff is transferred

6

for settlement only and then returned to prison for housing.

7

III.

CONCLUSION

8

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days

9

from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff and Defendant Fortune shall file a written

10

response to this order.2

11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 29, 2018

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1

The parties may wish to discuss the issue by telephone in determining whether they believe settlement

is feasible.
27
28

2
The issuance of this order does not guarantee referral for settlement, but the Court will make every
reasonable attempt to secure the referral should both parties desire a settlement conference.

2