(PC) Haygood v. Bostanjian ( 2020 )

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEON HAYGOOD, Case No. 1:19-cv-01011-NONE-EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 14 MARINA BOSTANJIAN, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Deon Haygood (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this federal civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. The court has determined that this 19 case will benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate 20 Judge Dennis M. Cota to conduct a settlement conference on November 5, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. The 21 settlement conference will be conducted by remote means, to be determined at a later date and 22 time. The Court will issue a transportation order, if necessary, in due course. 23 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 24 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota 25 on November 5, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be conducted by 26 remote means, to be determined at a later date and time. 27 2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding 28 settlement on the defendants’ behalf shall attend in person or by remote means, to be 2 determined at a later date and time.1 3 3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. 4 The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in 5 person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not 6 proceed and will be reset to another date. 7 4. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than October 8 29, 2020 to dmcorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential 9 settlement statement Attn: Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota, USDC CAED, 2986 10 Bechelli Lane, Suite 300, Redding, California 96002 so it arrives no later than October 11 29, 2020. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT 12 STATEMENT.” Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of 13 Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)). 14 15 Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on 16 any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with 17 the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. 18 19 The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, 20 typed or neatly printed, and include the following: 21 22 1 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 23 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 24 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 25 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). 26 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. 27 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 28 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). wOow 4:40 VV VEY LLIN □□ NS MMO eS IO OPEN OY VM VI 1 2 a. A brief statement of the facts of the case. 3 b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, 1.e., statutory or other grounds upon 4 which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of 5 prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in 6 dispute. 7 c. A summary of the proceedings to date. 8 d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and 9 trial. 10 e. The relief sought. 11 f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a 12 history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands. 13 g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement 14 conference, including how much a party is willing to accept and/or willing to pay. 15 h. Ifthe parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims 16 not in this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above, 17 including case number(s) if applicable. 18 5. Judge Cota or another representative from the court will be contacting the parties 19 either by telephone or in person, approximately two weeks prior to the settlement 20 conference, to ascertain each party’s expectations of the settlement conference. 21 6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office 22 at Mule Creek State Prison, via facsimile at (209) 274-5018 or via email. 23 DA IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 | Dated: _ August 10, 2020 [Je heey □□ 26 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28