Johnson v. Healthy Partnerships et al

Filing 12

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/1/2011 ORDERING 11 that dispositional document shall be filed no later than 10/3/2011; Initial Scheduling Conference CONTINUTED to 10/17/2011 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr.; in the event no dispositional document is filed, or if this action is not otherwise dismissed; A joint status report shall be filed 14 days prior to the Status Conference. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

Scott N. Johnson,

10

Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16

v.
Healthy Partnerships,
Individually and d/b/a/ Healthy
Partnerships; Healthy
Properties, a General
Partnership,
Defendants.
________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:11-cv-01405-GEB-CKD
ORDER RE: SETTLEMENT AND
DISPOSITION

Plaintiff filed a “Notice of Settlement” on September 1, 2011,

17
18

in

which

he

states,

“the

parties

have

settled

this

action[,

and

19

d]ispositional documents will be filed within (30) calendar days.” (ECF

20

No. 11.)

21

Therefore, a dispositional document shall be filed no later

22

than October 3, 2011. Failure to respond by this deadline may be

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

grounds for sanctions.”).

27
28

Further,

the

Status

Conference

scheduled

for

hearing

on

September 19, 2011, is continued to October 17, 2011, commencing at 9:00

1

1

a.m., in the event no dispositional document is filed, or if this action

2

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

3

fourteen (14) days prior to the Status Conference.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 1, 2011

6
7

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
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