Kumar v. Johnson et al

Filing 25

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/15/16 ORDERING that this case is set for a settlement conference before the undersigned to occur on March 22, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #25. Plaintiff will appear at the settlement conference by video conference, from his present place of detainment, as directed by separate order. Parties are required to file a signed Waiver of Disqualification no later than March 8, 2017. Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on ICE Case Manager Sandra Kroman via facsimile at [phone].(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANIL KUMAR,

12
13
14

No. 2:16-cv-0768 KJN P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

JEH JOHNSON, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is an immigration detainee, proceeding without counsel. Plaintiff seeks relief

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Federal Agents of the Fed. Bureau

19

of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (“RFRA”) and the

20

Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”). The court has determined

21

that this case will benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be set for a

22

settlement conference before the undersigned to occur at the U.S. District Court, 501 I Street,

23

Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #25 on March 22, 2017, at 9:30 a.m.

24
25
26
27
28

Parties will be required to file a signed “Waiver of Disqualification” (attached below), no
later than March 8, 2017.
A separate order and writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue concurrently with
this order.
1

1

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before the undersigned to occur on March

3

22, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California

4

95814 in Courtroom #25.
2. Plaintiff will appear at the settlement conference by video conference, from his present

5

place of detainment, as directed by separate order.

6

3. Parties are required to file a signed “Waiver of Disqualification” no later than March

7

8, 2017.

8

4. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding

9

settlement shall attend in person1.

10

5. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages.

11
12

The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in

13

person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not

14

proceed and will be reset to another date.

15

6. The parties are directed to exchange non-confidential settlement statements seven days

16

prior to the settlement conference. These statements shall simultaneously be delivered

17

to the court using the following email address: [e-mail]. Plaintiff

18

shall mail his non-confidential settlement statement to arrive not less than seven days

19

prior to the settlement conference, addressed to Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman,

20
While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has the
authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement
conferences… .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051,
1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2012)(“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in mandatory
settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the
mediation conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any
settlement terms acceptable to the parties. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648,
653 (7th Cir. 1989), cited with approval in Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F.3d 1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993).
The individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the
settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz.
2003), amended on recon. in part, Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 2003 WL 23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The
purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the parties’ view of
the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Pitman, 216 F.R.D. at 486. An authorization to
settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to comply with the requirement of full
authority to settle. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596-97 (8th Cir. 2001).
1

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1

USDC CAED, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, CA 95814. The envelope shall

2

be marked “Settlement Statement.” If a party desires to share additional confidential

3

information with the court, they may do so pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule

4

270(d) and (e).

5
6
7

7. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on ICE Case Manager
Sandra Kroman via facsimile at [phone].
Dated: December 15, 2016

8
9
10
Kuma0768.med
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANIL KUMAR,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:16-cv-0768 KJN P
Plaintiff,

v.

WAIVER OF DISQUALIFICATION

JEH JOHNSON, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Under Local Rule 270(b) of the Eastern District of California, the parties to the

18

herein action affirmatively request that Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman participate in the

19

settlement conference scheduled for March 22, 2017. To the extent the parties consent to trial of

20

the case before the assigned Magistrate Judge, they waive any claim of disqualification to the

21

assigned Magistrate Judge trying the case thereafter.

22

By:
Plaintiff

23
24

Dated:_________________

25
26
27
28

By:
Attorney for Defendants
Dated:_________________
4