Buckley v. High Desert State Prison et al

Filing 40

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 04/12/15 ordering within 21 days of the date of this order, the parties shall each inform the court in writing as to whether they wish to proceed with the settlement conference before the undersigned magistrate judge or if they wish to be referred to the court's mediation program. If the parties wish to proceed before the undersigned magistrate judge, each party shall return to the court the consent form for settlement conferences provided with this order. If the parties do not wish the undersigned magistrate judge to preside at the settlement conference, each party shall file a declaration stating that they wish to be referred to the court's mediation program. The clerk of the court shall send each party the consent form for settlement conferences. (Attachments: # 1 Settlement consent form)(Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JULES BUCKLEY,

12
13
14

No. 2:11-cv-01310 KJM DAD P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action seeking relief under

18

42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that defendant A. E. Ritola violated the Eighth Amendment’s

19

prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment by subjecting plaintiff to unconstitutional prison

20

working conditions.

21

On September 17, 2013, the undersigned issued a discovery and scheduling order in this

22

case that required the parties to file all pretrial motions on or before March 28, 2014. (ECF

23

No. 28.) The court advised the parties that it would set pretrial conference and trial dates, as

24

appropriate, after adjudication of any dispositive motion or upon expiration of the time for filing

25

such a motion.

26

On March 25, 2014, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 33.) On

27

November 26, 2014, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations recommending that

28

defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part. (ECF No. 36.)
1

1

On February 9, 2015, the assigned district judge issued an order adopting those findings and

2

recommendations in their entirety. (ECF No. 39.)

3

In due course, the court will issue a further scheduling order setting dates for pretrial

4

statements, pretrial conference, and jury trial. However, before issuing the scheduling order, the

5

court will set a mandatory settlement conference in this case. If available, the court may order

6

that plaintiff participate in the settlement conference by way of videoconferencing. Pursuant to

7

Local Rule 270(b), the parties will be directed to inform the court in writing as to whether they

8

wish to proceed with the settlement conference before the undersigned magistrate judge or if they

9

wish to be referred to the court’s mediation program.

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1. Within twenty-one days of the date of this order, the parties shall each inform the court

12

in writing as to whether they wish to proceed with the settlement conference before the

13

undersigned magistrate judge or if they wish to be referred to the court’s mediation program. If

14

the parties wish to proceed before the undersigned magistrate judge, each party shall return to the

15

court the consent form for settlement conferences provided with this order. If the parties do not

16

wish the undersigned magistrate judge to preside at the settlement conference, each party shall

17

file a declaration stating that they wish to be referred to the court’s mediation program.

18

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send each party the consent form for settlement

19

conferences.

20

Dated: April 12, 2015

21
22
23
24
25

DAD:10
buck1310.sc

26
27
28
2