(PC) Hodges v. Seibert ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES ALBERT HODGES, No. 2:20-cv-00896-JAM-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. SEIBERT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 18 action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 1, 2021, Plaintiff filed a letter that the 19 Court construed as a motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order. ECF No. 47. In 20 response, the court ordered defendant Seibert to respond to the motion. ECF No. 48. Defendant 21 responded by requesting a settlement conference and requesting that the court defer ruling on 22 plaintiff’s request until after the parties have had the opportunity to participate in a settlement 23 conference. By way of reply, plaintiff requested a settlement conference as well. ECF No. 50. 24 Based upon the parties briefs, it appears that the posture of this case has changed and that 25 it may benefit from a settlement conference at this time. Therefore, this matter will be stayed 26 pending a settlement conference that will be conducted by remote means, to be determined at a 27 later date and time. The Court will issue the necessary writ to secure plaintiff’s participation 28 following the selection of a date for the settlement conference. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The parties’ motions to schedule a settlement conference (ECF Nos. 49, 50) are 3 granted. 4 2. The pretrial motions deadline included in the court’s Discovery and Scheduling 5 Order of April 7, 2021 is hereby vacated. 6 3. Plaintiff’s motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 47) is 7 denied without prejudice to the filing of a motion to reopen discovery in the event 8 that this case does not settle. All pending deadlines governing this case will be 9 reset as necessary following the completion of the settlement conference. 10 4. Within 14 days from the date of this order, the assigned Deputy Attorney General 11 shall contact the Courtroom Deputy, Judy Streeter, at (916) 930-4004, to schedule 12 a settlement conference to be conducted by remote means. 13 5. This action is stayed until the conclusion of the settlement conference to allow the 14 parties an opportunity to settle their dispute. No other pleadings or other 15 documents may be filed in this case during the stay of this action. 16 6. A representative with authority to negotiate and enter into a binding settlement on 17 Defendant’s behalf shall attend. A representative with full and unlimited authority 18 shall be available to join the settlement conference by telephone, if needed.1 19 1 While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has 20 the 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 21 Islands, 694 F.3d 1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2012) (“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in mandatory settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to 22 settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation conference must be authorized to fully 23 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), 24 cited with approval in Official 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 25 change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pitman v. 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., 26 2003 WL 23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person 27 with full settlement 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 28 or sum certain can be found not to comply with the requirement of full authority to settle. Nick v. 1 7. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. 2 The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to 3 appear in person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the 4 conference will not proceed and will be reset to another date. 5 8. Once the settlement conference is scheduled, at least seven days prior to 6 conference, the parties shall submit to the assigned settlement judge a confidential 7 settlement conference statement. The parties’ confidential settlement conference 8 statement shall include the following: (a) names and locations of the parties; (b) a 9 short statement of the facts and alleged damages; (c) a short procedural history; (d) 10 an analysis of the risk of liability, including a discussion of the efforts made to 11 investigate the allegations; and (e) a discussion of the efforts that have been made 12 to settle the case; and (f) any documents which have not already been filed with 13 the court and which may be relevant to resolution of this case. Plaintiff shall mail 14 his non-confidential settlement statement so that it arrives at least seven days prior 15 to the settlement conference. The envelope shall be marked “SETTLEMENT 16 STATEMENT.” The date and time of the settlement conference shall be 17 prominently indicated on the settlement statement. Ifa party desires to share 18 additional confidential information with the Court, they may do so pursuant to the 19 provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e). 20 | Dated: October 7, 2021 □□ / dp ai 21 CAROLYNK. DELANEY 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 || 12/hhodg0896.ADR(2).docx 26 27 28 | Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596-97 (8th Cir. 2001).