Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02328/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02328-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1319 Pollutants &amp; Permit Violations

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING

PROTECTION ALLIANCE

Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-05-02328 DFL GGH

vs.

COURT GALVANIZING INC.

Defendant. ORDER

___________________________________/

The parties and counsel met in settlement conference as scheduled on March 28,

2006. At this conference, it became evident to all concerned that the parties’ consultants needed

to frankly discuss the issues in this case with each other under the umbrella of settlement

conference confidentiality. If they did candidly discuss the issues in this case, it is possible that

many issues could be resolved or substantially narrowed.

Therefore, after agreement by the parties, the undersigned ordered the following

process:

1. The consultants in this case will meet and confer no later than Friday, April 7, 2006, and

hopefully, much earlier. The meeting is to be in person, if at all possible. The consultants will

discuss problems and solutions germane to resolution of this case. In other words, plaintiff’s

Case 2:05-cv-02328-DFL-GGH Document 12 Filed 03/29/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

consultant will identify a problem with its attendant reasonable solution, and defendant’s

consultant, through the course of mutual discussion, will agree, or not, that a problems exists, and

tentatively accept, reject, supplement, or otherwise modify the proposed solution.

2. Plaintiff shall serve on defendant and e-mail to the undersigned, no later than Monday, April

10, 2006, its specific statement as to the issues which have been resolved, and those issues

remaining for which plaintiff proposes a specific solution. Plaintiff shall briefly discuss why a

specific problem is indeed a problem, and how the proposed solution, or iterative process, is the

best, reasonable means to rectify the problem. To the extent legal discussion is required, the

undersigned would find such brief discussion helpful.

3. Defendant shall serve on plaintiff, and e-mail to the undersigned, no later than April 17, 2006,

its response affirming resolution where an issue has arrived at resolution, and specifically

responding to identified remaining problems with attendant solutions. If defendant disagrees with

a proposed solution, defendant shall state why, and propose, if appropriate, a counter-resolution. 

Again, to the extent legal discussion is helpful to the discussion, the undersigned would appreciate

such.

4. The parties and counsel, and with consultants if appropriate, shall meet in further settlement

conference before the undersigned on April 21, 2006 at 1:30 p.m.

No scheduling order has been issued in this case. Therefore, the undersigned

orders that all discovery be stayed pending completion of the above mentioned process. Any

further stay orders will be considered, if necessary, after the April 21, 2006 further settlement

conference.

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:05-cv-02328-DFL-GGH Document 12 Filed 03/29/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

All conversations taking place under the auspices of this order, and writings and

other documents generated for, and/or utilized in, the above described process, are confidential

and not to be used in the litigation, if further litigation is necessary, unless the parties agree

otherwise. 

IT IS SO ORDERED

DATED: March 28, 2006 

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-02328-DFL-GGH Document 12 Filed 03/29/06 Page 3 of 3