(PC) Munoz v. Underwood et al

Filing 45

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 41 Motion Requesting a Settlement Conference signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 10/09/2019. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

MOIZEZ M. MUNOZ,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

v.
UNDERWOOD, et al.,

Case No. 1:18-cv-01665-DAD-EPG (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
REQUESTING A SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
(ECF NOS. 39 & 41)

Defendants.

17
18
19
20
21

Moizez Munoz (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On August 16, 2019, defense counsel opted out of having an early settlement conference

22

in this case, stating “after review of the matter, counsel believes that the Plaintiff's position and

23

valuation of the case exceeds the defense valuation of the case to an extent that a settlement

24

conference would not be productive at this time.” (ECF No. 35, p. 1).

25

On September 30, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a settlement conference. (ECF

26

Nos. 39 & 41). On October 8, 2019, Defendants filed an opposition, stating that “[a] settlement

27

conference is unlikely to be productive at this time.” (ECF No. 44, p. 1).

28

In light of Defendants’ opposition, the Court will not order that a settlement conference be
1

1

set at this time. As noted previously, “Plaintiff can always send Defense counsel a settlement

2

offer, and it will be kept confidential and cannot be used in the litigation.” (ECF No. 43).

3

Additionally, the Court may discuss the setting of a settlement conference at the scheduling

4

conference that is currently set for December 2, 2019.

5
6

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion requesting a settlement conference
(ECF Nos. 39 & 41) is DENIED.

7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 9, 2019

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2