(PC) Delgado v. Lizarraga et al

Filing 78

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/29/2022 SETTING a Settlement Conference for 11/3/2022 at 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota, by Zoom video conference. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negoti ate and enter into a binding settlement on the defendants' behalf shall attend in person. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. Parties are DIRECTED to submit confidential settlement statements no late r than 10/27/2022, and to file a "Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement." Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on any other party. Judge Cota or another representative from the court will be contacting the parties either by telephone or in person, approximately 2 weeks prior to the settlement conference, to ascertain each party's expectations of the settlement conference. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office at Mule Creek State Prison. (cc: DMC, ADR, IT)(Huang, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

KENNETH DELGADO,

13
14
15
16

No. 2:19-cv-1540 KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.
JOE A. LIZARRAGA, et al.,

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

Defendants.

17
18
19

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42

20

U.S.C. § 1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference.

21

Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota to conduct a settlement

22

conference on November 3, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be conducted by

23

remote means, with all parties appearing by Zoom video conference. The Court will issue the

24

necessary transportation order in due course.

25

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

26

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota

27

on November 3, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be conducted by

28

remote means, with all parties appearing by Zoom video conference.
1

1
2
3

2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding
settlement on the defendants’ behalf shall attend in person. 1

4
5

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

6

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

7

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

8

proceed and will be reset to another date.

9

4. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than October

10

27, 2022 to [e-mail]. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential

11

settlement statement to Attn: Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota, USDC CAED, 2986

12

Bechelli Lane, Suite 300, Redding, California 96002 so it arrives no later than October

13

27, 2022. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT

14

STATEMENT.” Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of

15

Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).

16
17

Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on

18

any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with

19

the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.

20
The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length,

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

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

2

1
2

typed or neatly printed, and include the following:

3

a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.

4

b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon

5

which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of

6

prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in

7

dispute.

8

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

9

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and

10

trial.

11

e. The relief sought.

12

f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a

13

history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.

14

g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement

15

conference, including how much a party is willing to accept and/or willing to pay.

16

h. If the parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims

17

not in this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above,

18

including case number(s) if applicable.

19

5. Judge Cota or another representative from the court will be contacting the parties

20

either by telephone or in person, approximately two weeks prior to the settlement

21

conference, to ascertain each party’s expectations of the settlement conference.

22

6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office

23
24

at Mule Creek State Prison via facsimile at [phone] or via email.
Dated: July 29, 2022

25
26
27
28

/delg1540.med

3