Luckert v. Brannon et al

Filing 94

Report of Pro Se Prisoner Early Settlement Proceeding. Settled. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on 1/25/16. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service mailing)(glm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/25/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MICHAEL LANDON LUCKERT, Case No. 13-cv-04426-EDL (NJV) Plaintiff, 8 v. REPORT OF PRO SE PRISONER EARLY SETTLEMENT PROCEEDING 9 10 J. BRANNON, et al., Defendants. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 A settlement conference was held on January 25, 2016, and the results of that proceeding are indicated below: (1) The following individuals, parties, and/or representatives participated in the 16 proceeding, and each possessed the requisite settlement authority: 17 ( X ) Plaintiff Michael Luckert. 18 ( ) Warden or warden’s representative 19 ( ) Office of the California Attorney General 20 ( X ) Other: Mary Ellyn Gormley, Alameda County Counsel. 21 (2) The following individuals, parties, and/or representatives did not appear: 22 _____________________________________________________________________ 23 (3) The outcome of the proceeding was: 24 25 26 ( X) The case has been completely settled. A telephonic status conference is set for March 22, 2016 at 1:00 pm. ( ) The case has been partially resolved and counsel for defendants shall file a joint 27 stipulation regarding those claims which have been resolved. The issues outlined on the sheet 28 attached remain for this Court to resolve. 1 2 3 4 5 ( ) The parties are unable to reach an agreement at this time. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 25, 2016 ______________________________________ NANDOR J. VADAS United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?