Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01362/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01362-5/pdf.json

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

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT HACKWORTH, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

E. AREVALOS, et al.,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:19-cv-01362-NONE-JLT (PC)

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION REQUESTING 

THE COURT TO SCREEN PLAINTIFF[’S] 

COMPLAINT

(Doc. 25)

ORDER REFERRING THE CASE TO 

POST-SCREENING ADR PROJECT AND 

STAYING THE CASE FOR 90 DAYS 

When at least one defendant has been served and/or filed an answer, the Court refers all 

post-screening, civil rights cases filed by pro se inmates to the Post-Screening Alternative 

Dispute Resolution Project to attempt to resolve cases more quickly and less expensively. 

Defense counsel from the Office of the California Attorney General has agreed to participate in 

this pilot project. No defenses or objections are waived by participation.

As set forth in the screening order, the Court has found that Plaintiff has stated at least 

one cognizable civil rights claim. Thus, the Court STAYS this action for 90 days to allow the 

parties to investigate Plaintiff’s claims, meet and confer, and participate in a settlement 

conference.

There is a presumption that all post-screening civil rights cases assigned to the

undersigned will proceed to settlement conference. However, if after investigating Plaintiff’s 

Case 1:19-cv-01362-KES-CDB Document 30 Filed 05/05/21 Page 1 of 4
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

2

claims and speaking with Plaintiff, and after conferring with defense counsel’s supervisor,

counsel finds in good faith that a settlement conference would be a waste of resources,1defense 

counsel may move to opt out of this pilot project.

Within 35 days, the assigned Deputy Attorney General SHALL contact the Courtroom 

Deputy Clerk at SHall@caed.uscourts.gov, to schedule the settlement conference. If the 

settlement conference cannot be set quickly due to the Court’s calendar, the parties may seek an 

extension of the initial 90-day stay.

Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion Requesting the Court to Screen Plaintiff[’s] Complaint (Doc. 25) 

is DENIED as moot.

2. This action is STAYED for 90 days to allow the parties an opportunity to settle 

their dispute before a responsive pleading is filed, or the discovery process begins. No other 

pleadings or other documents may be filed in this case during the stay. The parties SHALL NOT

engage in formal discovery, but they may jointly agree to engage in informal discovery.

3. Within 30 days from the date of this Order, the parties SHALL file the attached 

notice, indicating their agreement to proceed to an early settlement conference or whether they 

believe settlement is not achievable at this time. 

4. Within 35 days from the date of this Order, the assigned Deputy Attorney 

General SHALL contact this court’s Courtroom Deputy Clerk at SHall@caed.uscourts.gov, to 

schedule the settlement conference; 

5. If the parties settle this case during the stay, they SHALL file a Notice of Settlement 

as required by Local Rule 160;

6. The Clerk of Court SHALL serve via email, copies of: a. Plaintiff’s second 

amended complaint (Doc. 20), b. the screening orders (Docs. 19, 26), and c. this Order to 

Supervising Deputy Attorney General Christopher Becker and a copy of this Order to ADR 

Coordinator Sujean Park;

1 By way of guidance, if the defense intends to file an exhaustion motion and believes in good faith that it 

has a significant chance of success, use of the opt-out provision is likely appropriate.

Case 1:19-cv-01362-KES-CDB Document 30 Filed 05/05/21 Page 2 of 4
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

3

7. The parties are reminded of their obligation to keep the Court informed of any 

changes of addresses during the stay and while the action is pending. Changes of address must be 

reported promptly in a separate document entitled “Notice of Change of Address.” See L.R. 

182(f).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2021 _ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

 CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01362-KES-CDB Document 30 Filed 05/05/21 Page 3 of 4
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

4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT HACKWORTH, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

E. AREVALOS, et al.,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:19-cv-1362 NONE JLT (PC) 

NOTICE REGARDING EARLY 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

1. The party or counsel for the party signing below, agrees that there is a good chance

that an early settlement conference will resolve this action and wishes to engage in an early 

settlement conference.

Yes ____ No ____

2. The plaintiff (Check one):

_____ Would like to participate in the settlement conference in person, OR

_____ Would like to participate in the settlement conference by video conference.

Dated:

________________________________

Plaintiff or Counsel for Defendants 

Case 1:19-cv-01362-KES-CDB Document 30 Filed 05/05/21 Page 4 of 4