Johnson v. Gentry et al

Filing 94

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 81 and 87 Plaintiff Lausteveion Johnsons Requests for Settlement Conference Via Video are DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah on 6/22/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

2

***

3
4

LAUSTEVEION JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

5
6
7
8

Case No. 2:17-cv-01671-APG-EJY
ORDER

v.
GENTRY, et al.
Defendants.

9

Presently before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Lausteveion Johnson’s Requests for Settlement

10

Conference Via Video. ECF Nos. 81 and 87. The Court has considered Plaintiff’s Requests and

11

Defendants’ Opposition (ECF No. 91).

12

Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Requests plainly states that Defendants have “do not

13

have a settlement offer and do not intend to provide a monetary offer.” ECF No. 91 at 1. Defendants

14

further state that at the last jury trial involving Plaintiff, the jury returned a defense verdict. Id. at 2.

15

Given these representations, and understanding the numerous cases Plaintiff has filed (including,

16

without limitation, Johnson v. NDOC et al, 2:11-cv-00675-PMP-LRL; Johnson v. Kraft Foods et al,

17

2:16-cv-00042-MMD-GWF; Johnson v. Dr. Lee, et al, 3:13-cv-00273-RCJ-VPC; Johnson v. Smith

18

et al, 3:16-cv-00556-RCJ-VPC; and Johnson v. Covid-19 et al., 2:21-cv-00247-APG-EJY), the

19

Court finds that a settlement conference in this case is not a reasonable use of the Court’s resources.

20

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Lausteveion Johnson’s Requests for

21

Settlement Conference Via Video (ECF Nos. 81 and 87) are DENIED.

22
23

DATED THIS 22nd day of June, 2021.

24
25
26
27
28

ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
1