Bancroft v. Garza et al

Filing 17

ORDER Setting Settlement Conference on July 16, 2018 at CSP-Corcoran, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 05/22/18. ( Settlement Conference set for 7/16/2018 at 08:30 AM before Magistrate Judge ) (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CAMERON LAWRENCE BANCROFT,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:17-cv-01444-DAD-EPG (PC)
ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE ON JULY 16, 2018

v.
I. GARZA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

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

18

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a

19

settlement conference.

20

settlement conference at California State Prison, Corcoran (“CSP-COR”), 4001 King Avenue,

21

Corcoran, CA 93212, on July 16, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. The Court will issue the necessary transportation

22

writ in due course.

Therefore, this case will be referred to a magistrate judge to conduct a

23

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

24

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before a federal Magistrate Judge on July 16,

25
26

2018, at CSP-COR.
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
2

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

3

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

4

appear in person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will

5

not proceed and will be reset to another date.

6

4. Defendants shall provide a confidential settlement statement to the following email

7

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

8

statement to U.S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California, 93721,

9

“Attention: Institution Settlement Judge for July 16, 2018.” The envelope shall be

10

marked “Confidential Settlement Statement”. Settlement statements shall arrive no later

11

than July 9, 2018. Parties shall also file a Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement

12

Conference Statement (see Local Rule 270(d)). Settlement statements should not be filed

13

with the Clerk of the Court nor served on any other party. Settlement statements shall be

14

clearly marked Aconfidential@ with the date and time of the settlement conference indicated

15

prominently thereon.

16

5. The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, typed
or neatly printed, and include the following:

17

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

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

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).
2

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

trial.

6

d. The party=s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a

7

history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.

8
9

e. A brief statement of each party=s expectations and goals for the settlement

10

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

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
Dated:
14

May 22, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3