(PC) Vallery v. Degallegos, et al

Filing 40

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota on 7/29/22, ( Settlement Conference set for 10/13/2022 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 9 (JDP) before Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson.) No later than one week prior to the settlement conference, each party must submit to Judge Peterson's chambers at [e-mail], or by mail at U.S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, a confidential settlement conference statement. These statements should neither be filed on the docket nor served on any other party. The statements should be marked "CONFIDENTIAL" and should state the date and time of the conference. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office at the California State Prison, Solano via facsimile at [phone] or via email. (cc: ADR & JDP)(Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

FOR THEEASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

RAYNARD VALLERY,

13

Plaintiff,

14
15

No. 2:19-CV-1813-JAM-DMC-P

v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

DEGALLEGOS, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

18
19

§ 1983. The Court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference.

20

Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson to conduct a

21

settlement conference on October 13, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be

22

conducted by remote means, with all parties appearing by Zoom video conference. The Court

23

will issue the necessary transportation order in due course.
Counsel for the defendant is directed to contact the Court via

24
25

[e-mail] one week prior to the scheduled settlement conference to report

26

on the institution’s ability, in light of any COVID 19 restrictions, to produce the inmate for a

27

remote appearance.

28

///
1

1
2

The Court expects that the parties will proceed with the settlement conference in good

3

faith and attempt to resolve all or part of the case. If any party believes that the settlement

4

conference will not be productive, that party shall so inform the court as far in advance of the

5

settlement conference as possible.

6

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

7

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Jeremy D.

8

Peterson on October 13, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be

9

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

10

2. Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the court, the following individuals must

11

attend the settlement conference: (1) all of the attorney(s) who will try the case; and

12

(2) individuals with full authority to negotiate and settle the case, on any terms.

13

3. No later than one week prior to the settlement conference, each party must submit to

14

Judge Peterson’s chambers at [e-mail], or by mail at U.S. District

15

Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, a confidential settlement conference

16

statement. These statements should neither be filed on the docket nor served on any

17

other party. The statements should be marked “CONFIDENTIAL” and should state

18

the date and time of the conference. The statements should not be lengthy but should

19

include:

20

a. A brief recitation of the facts;

21

b. A discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the case;

22

c. An itemized estimate of the expected costs for further discovery, pretrial, and

23
24
25
26
27
28

trial matters, in specific dollar terms;
d. Your best estimate of the probability that plaintiff will obtain a finding of
liability should this case proceed to trial, in percentage terms;
e. Should this case proceed to trial and defendant be found liable, please provide
the following, in specific dollar terms:
i. A realistic high-end recovery estimate (i.e., realistic best- or worst-case
2

1
2

scenario);

3

ii. A realistic low-end recovery estimate (i.e., realistic worst- or best-case

4

scenario); and

5

iii. A best estimate of the most likely outcome;

6

f. A history of settlement discussions, including:

7

i. A statement of your expectations for settlement discussions;

8

ii. A listing of any past and present settlement offers from any party

9

(including all terms); and

10

iii. Whether your party would consider making the opening offer or
demand, and what that offer might be1;

11
12

g. A list of the individuals who will be participating in the settlement conference

13

on your party’s behalf, including each participant’s name and, if appropriate,

14

title;

15

h. Plaintiff’s anticipated release date;

16

i. An estimate of restitution and fees, including court fees and filing fees, owed

17

by plaintiff; and

18

j. Identification of any related cases or of any other cases that the parties might

19

wish to discuss at this settlement conference.

20

4. Judge Peterson or another representative from the court will be contacting the parties

21

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

22

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

23

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

24

at the California State Prison, Solano via facsimile at [phone] or via email.

25

Dated: July 29, 2022
____________________________________
DENNIS M. COTA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28

1

Please note that Judge Peterson will consider this response, among others, in evaluating whether
proceeding with a settlement conference appears worthwhile.
3