Pasillas, et al. v. State of California, et al.

Filing 69

ORDER setting Settlement Conference for 10/1/2018 at 09:30 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street, before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 8/17/2018. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

ABELARDO PASILLAS, et al.,

11
12
13
14

Case No. 1:17-cv-00712-LJO-EPG

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16
17
18

Plaintiffs are proceeding through counsel in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs are represented by attorney Cameron Sehat.
The court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference.

19

Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston to conduct a

20

settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, California 93301 on

21

October 1, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.

22

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

23

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L.

24

Thurston on October 1, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 510 19th Street,

25

Bakersfield, California 93301.

26

2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding

27
28

1

settlement shall attend in person.1

1

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

2
3

The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in

4

person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not

5

proceed and will be reset to another date.
4. At least 21 days before the settlement conference, plaintiffs SHALL submit to

6
7

defendants a written itemization of damages and a meaningful settlement demand,

8

which includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate, not to

9

exceed ten pages in length. Thereafter, no later than 14 days before the settlement

10

conference, defendants SHALL respond, in writing, with an acceptance of the offer or

11

with a meaningful counteroffer, which includes a brief explanation of why such a

12

settlement is appropriate. If settlement is achieved, defense counsel is to immediately

13

inform the courtroom deputy of Magistrate Judge Thurston.
5. If settlement is not achieved informally, each party shall provide a confidential

14
15

settlement statement to the following email address: [e-mail].

16

Settlement statements shall arrive no later than September 24, 2018. Parties shall also

17

file a Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement (See L.R. 270(d)).

18
Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

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. Pitman 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).
1

2

1

any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with

2

the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.

3
4

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

5

include the following:

6
7

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

8

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

9

which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of

10

prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in

11

dispute.

12

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

13

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

14
15

e. The relief sought.

16

f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a
history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.

17

g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement

18

conference, including how much a party is willing to accept and/or willing to pay.

19
20
21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 17, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

3