(HC) (DP) Gordon v. Chappell ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK BRUCE GORDON, Case No. 2:91-cv-00882-MCE-JDP (DP) 12 Petitioner, DEATH PENALTY CASE 13 v. ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 14 RON DAVIS, ECF No. 456 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner has filed a motion that asks the court to defer consider of his pending motion for 18 summary judgment, which is fully briefed, and to set a settlement conference.1 ECF No. 456; see 19 ECF No. 421. Respondent opposes the motion. ECF No. 458. 20 Considering the number of claims in this capital habeas case and the substantial briefing 21 on the pending motion for summary judgment, see ECF Nos. 397, 421, 441, & 454, a settlement 22 judge would need to expend significant time to prepare for a settlement conference. And given 23 respondent’s resistance to participating in settlement discussions, a settlement conference would 24 likely be unproductive and hence a waste of scarce judicial resources. See Garrett v. Macomber, 25 No. 2:16-cv-1336-KJM-AC-P, 2019 WL 6330269, at *8 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 26, 2019) (denying 26 motion for a settlement conference “in light of defendants’ opposition”); McCarty v. Roos, No. 27 28 1 A hearing on petitioner’s motion was held on August 12, 2021. ECF No. 460. 1 | 2:11-cv-01538-JCM, 2013 WL 5436578, at *2 (D. Nev. Sept. 27, 2013) (“The Court generally 2 | does not grant motions for settlement conferences that are opposed.”’). 3 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for a settlement conference 4 | ECF No. 456, is denied. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ March 31, 2022 8 JEREMY D. PETERSON 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28