(PC) Park v. Fisher ( 2020 )

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 KENNETH PARK, Case No. 1:19-cv-01616-NONE-EPG (PC) 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 15 JOSE CHAVEZ, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Kenneth Park (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 19 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. The Court has determined that this case will 20 benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge 21 Allison Claire to conduct a settlement conference on December 15, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. The 22 settlement conference will be conducted by remote means, to be determined at a later date and 23 time. The Court will issue the necessary transportation order in due course. 24 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 26 December 15, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. The settlement conference will be conducted by 27 remote means, to be determined at a later date and time. 28 2. Parties are instructed to have a principal with full settlement authority present at the 2 Settlement Conference or to be fully authorized to settle the matter on any terms. The 3 individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and 4 authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. The purpose 5 behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the 6 parties’ view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. An 7 authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to 8 comply with the requirement of full authority to settle.1 9 3. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than 10 December 8, 2020, to acorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff shall mail his 11 confidential settlement statement Attn: Magistrate Judge Allison Claire, USDC 12 CAED, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, CA 95814, so that it arrives no later 13 than December 8, 2020. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL 14 SETTLEMENT STATEMENT.” Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of 15 Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement.” (See L.R. 270(d)). 16 Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of Court nor served on any 17 other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with the 18 date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. 19 4. 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 23 authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement conferences… .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th 24 Cir. 2012) (“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in mandatory settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation conference must be authorized 25 to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any 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 26 Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F.3d 1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993). 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. 27 Brinker Int’l., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 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 28 authority is that the parties’ view of 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 IVINS OME IO VO eT 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 the party’s expectations and goals for the settlement 14 conference, including how much the party is willing to accept and/or willing to 15 pay. 16 h. Ifthe parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims 17 not in this suit, a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above, 18 including case number(s) if applicable. 19 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation 20 Coordinator at Valley State Prison via email. 21 29 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 | Dated: _ August 10, 2020 [see hey — 24 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28