Humber v. Nelson & Kennard

Filing 14

ORDER RE: Settlement and Disposition signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 8/24/11. (Matson, R)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

HELENA HUMBER,
Plaintiff,

9
10

v.

11

NELSON & KENNARD,

12

Defendant.
________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:11-cv-01160-GEB-CKD
ORDER RE: SETTLEMENT AND
DISPOSITION

13
14

Plaintiff filed a “Notice of Settlement” on August 17, 2011,

15

in which she states, “this case has been settled[ and she] requests that

16

this . . . Court allow sixty (60) days with which to file dispositive

17

documentation.” (ECF No. 12.)

18

Therefore, a dispositional document shall be filed no later

19

than October 17, 2011. Failure to respond by this deadline may be

20

construed as consent to dismissal of this action without prejudice, and

21

a dismissal order could be filed. See E.D. Cal. R. 160(b) (“A failure to

22

file dispositional papers on the date prescribed by the Court may be

23

grounds for sanctions.”).

24

Further,

the

Status

Conference

scheduled

for

hearing

on

25

October 17, 2011, is continued to commence at 9:00 a.m. on November 28,

26

2011, in the event no dispositional document is filed, or if this action

27
28
1

1

is not otherwise dismissed.1 A joint status report shall be filed

2

fourteen (14) days prior to the Status Conference.

3

Plaintiff also states in its “Notice of Settlement”: “This

4

Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter until fully resolved.”

5

(ECF No. 12.) “[T]he mere fact that the parties agree that the court

6

should exercise continuing jurisdiction is not binding on the court.”

7

Arata v. Nu Skin Intern., Inc., 96 F.3d 1265, 1269 (9th Cir. 1996). “A

8

federal court may refuse to exercise continuing jurisdiction even though

9

the parties have agreed to it. Parties cannot confer jurisdiction by

10

stipulation or consent.” Collins v. Thompson, 8 F.3d 657, 859 (9th Cir.

11

1993).

12

disregarded.

13
14

Therefore, this portion of the “Notice of Settlement” is

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 24, 2011

15
16

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
United States District Judge

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

1

The Status Conference will remain on calendar, because the
mere representation that a case has been settled does not justify
vacating a scheduling proceeding. Cf. Callie v. Near, 829 F.2d 888, 890
(9th Cir. 1987) (indicating that a representation that claims have been
settled does not necessarily establish the existence of a binding
settlement agreement).
2