Simental v. Adams et al

Filing 33

ORDER REFERRING CASE TO PRO SE PRISONER SETTLEMENT PROGRAM 29 31 32 . (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 12/4/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/4/2017: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tfS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RUDY SIMENTAL,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

NANCY ADAMS, et al.,
Defendants.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 17-cv-00801-SI
ORDER REFERRING CASE TO PRO
SE PRISONER SETTLEMENT
PROGRAM
Re: Dkt. Nos. 29, 31

12
13

This case was set for a settlement conference on November 9, 2017, before Magistrate

14

Judge Kellison in the Eastern District of California, who intended to make use of students from the

15

University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law Prison Civil Rights Mediation Program in

16

conducting the settlement conference. The settlement conference did not go forward that day

17

because transportation problems arose (i.e., a wheelchair accessible van was not available to take

18

plaintiff to the courthouse) and plaintiff thereafter refused to participate by videoconference or

19

telephone.

20

Thereafter, the parties again expressed interest in having a settlement conference.

21

Plaintiff’s motion to reschedule a settlement conference is GRANTED. Docket No. 29. However,

22

the settlement conference will take place in the Northern District of California because the case no

23

longer fits with the schedule for the McGeorge School of Law Prison Civil Rights Mediation

24

Program.

25

Good cause appearing therefor, this case is now referred to Magistrate Judge Robert Illman

26

for settlement proceedings pursuant to the Pro Se Prisoner Mediation Program. (Although the

27

program is called a mediation program, Magistrate Judge Illman also may conduct settlement

28

conferences in his efforts to resolve cases referred through this program.) The proceedings will

1

take place within one hundred twenty days of the date this order is filed. Magistrate Judge

2

Illman will coordinate a time and date for a settlement proceeding with all interested parties and/or

3

their representatives and, within five days after the conclusion of the settlement proceedings, file

4

with the court a report for the proceedings.
The court was dismayed to learn that plaintiff declined to speak with Magistrate Judge

6

Kellison by telephone and/or videoconference after the transportation problem arose on the day of

7

the earlier scheduled settlement conference. A fair amount of judicial resources are consumed

8

preparing for settlement conferences and are wasted when a scheduled conference does not

9

proceed. To avoid that happening again, plaintiff is now specifically ordered to attend and

10

participate in the settlement conference proceedings. He does not have to reach a settlement or

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

5

other resolution of his claims, but he absolutely must attend and participate in all the settlement

12

conference proceedings. The conference may be set up so that he will appear in person, by

13

videoconference or by telephone -- and he must attend whatever format Magistrate Judge Illman

14

chooses. Plaintiff is cautioned that he may be sanctioned for failure to comply with an order to

15

participate in a settlement conference, and such sanctions may include dismissal of part or all of

16

the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(a), (f), and 41(b).

17

Defendants’ motion to file a long brief and to extend the deadline to file a summary

18

judgment motion is GRANTED. Docket No. 31. The court now VACATES the briefing schedule

19

for the motion for summary judgment. If the parties are unable to resolve this action during

20

settlement proceedings, the court will later set a new briefing schedule.

21
22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 4, 2017
______________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28
2