Johnson v. Mcilrath et al

Filing 16

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/16/16: The settlement conference set for September 22, 2016, is VACATED. This action is REFERRED to the VDRP. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SCOTT JOHNSON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-0180-MCE-CKD

v.

ORDER

JAY C. MCILRATH, in his individual and
representative capacity as Trustee—The
Mcilrath Family 2002 Trust, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
Plaintiff commenced this disability access case asserting a claim under the Americans

18
19

with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and related state law claims, and defendant has answered the

20

complaint. Thereafter, a settlement conference was set for September 22, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.
Due to the congestion of the court’s docket and the resultant inability of the court to

21
22

timely facilitate settlement conferences in all cases, the settlement conference is vacated and the

23

case is referred to the court’s Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program (“VDRP”).

24

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

25

1. The settlement conference set for September 22, 2016, is VACATED.

26

2. This action is REFERRED to the VDRP.1

27
28

1

The matter was previously stayed by the district judge on February 24, 2015. See ECF

No. 5.
1

1

3. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, the parties shall contact the court’s VDRP

2

administrator, Sujean Park, at [phone] or [e-mail], to start

3

the process of selecting an appropriate neutral.

4
5
6

4. The parties shall carefully review and comply with Local Rule 271, which outlines the
specifications and requirements of the VDRP.
5. No later than fourteen (14) days after completion of the VDRP session, the parties

7

shall jointly file their VDRP Completion Report, consistent with Local Rule 271(o).

8

6. Any party that objects to this referral to the VDRP shall file its objections within seven

9

(7) days of this order. Such objections shall clearly outline why that party believes

10
11
12

that the action is not appropriate for referral to the VDRP.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 16, 2016.

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