Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00598/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00598-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK A. SCOTT,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

CASTILLO, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:20-cv-00598-ADA-GSA-PC

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO 

NOTIFY COURT WHETHER A 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD 

BE BENEFICIAL

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 

II. BACKGROUND

Mark Anthony Scott (“Plaintiff”) is a former prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint 

commencing this action on April 27, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) This case now proceeds against 

defendant C/O David Castillo (“Defendant”) for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth 

Amendment. 

On March 1, 2022, the Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order establishing

deadlines for the parties, including a discovery deadline of August 1, 2022, and a dispositive 

motion filing deadline of October 1, 2022. (ECF No. 26.) All of the deadlines have now expired, 

no dispositive motions have been filed, and no other motions are pending.

At this stage of the proceedings, the Court ordinarily proceeds to schedule the case for 

trial.

Case 1:20-cv-00598-KES-GSA Document 28 Filed 10/14/22 Page 1 of 2
2

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

27

28

II. SETTLEMENT PROCEEDINGS

The Court is able to refer cases for mediation before a participating United States 

Magistrate Judge. Settlement conferences are ordinarily held in person at the Court or at a prison 

in the Eastern District of California. Plaintiff and Defendant shall notify the Court whether they 

believe, in good faith, that settlement in this case is a possibility and whether they are interested 

in having a settlement conference scheduled by the Court.1 

Defendant’s counsel shall notify the Court whether there are security concerns that would 

prohibit scheduling a settlement conference. If security concerns exist, counsel shall notify the 

Court whether those concerns can be adequately addressed if Plaintiff is transferred for settlement 

only and then returned to prison for housing.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) days from 

the date of service of this order, Plaintiff and Defendant shall each file a written response to this 

order, notifying the Court whether they believe, in good faith, that settlement in this case is a 

possibility and whether they are interested in having a settlement conference scheduled by the 

Court.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 14, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 The parties may wish to discuss the issue by telephone in determining whether they believe settlement 

is feasible.

2 The issuance of this order does not guarantee referral for settlement, but the Court will make every 

reasonable attempt to secure the referral should both parties desire a settlement conference.

Case 1:20-cv-00598-KES-GSA Document 28 Filed 10/14/22 Page 2 of 2