Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-00625/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-00625-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act

---

1

16cv625-JLS (BLM)

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JORDAN LEWIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMCOL SYSTEMS, INC. AND PALOMAR 

HEALTH,

Defendants.

Case No.: 16cv625-JLS (BLM)

ORDER FOLLOWING TELEPHONIC 

EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION 

CONFERENCE SETTING FOLLOW-UP 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

On June 29, 2016, the Court conducted a telephonic Early Neutral Evaluation Conference. 

Based on the settlement discussions, the Court declines to open discovery and sets a follow-up 

Settlement Conference for August 4, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. in the chambers of Magistrate Judge 

Barbara L. Major located at 333 West Broadway, Suite 1110, San Diego, CA 92101. All 

discussions at the Settlement Conference will be informal, off the record, privileged, and 

confidential. Counsel for any non-English speaking party is responsible for arranging for the 

appearance of an interpreter at the conference.

a. Personal Appearance of Parties Required: All parties, adjusters for 

insured defendants, and other representatives of a party having full and complete authority to 

enter into a binding settlement, as well as the principal attorneys responsible for the litigation, 

must be present in person and legally and factually prepared to discuss settlement of the case. 

Case 3:16-cv-00625-JLS-BLM Document 15 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 3
2

16cv625-JLS (BLM)

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

Counsel appearing without their clients (whether or not counsel has been given settlement 

authority) will be cause for immediate imposition of sanctions and may also result in the 

immediate termination of the conference.

Unless there is good cause, persons required to attend the conference pursuant to this 

Order shall not be excused from personal attendance. Requests for excuse from attendance for 

good cause shall be made in writing at least three (3) court days prior to the conference. Failure 

to appear in person at the Settlement Conference will be grounds for sanctions.

b. Full Settlement Authority Required: In addition to counsel who will try 

the case, a party or party representative with full settlement authority1 must be present for the 

conference. In the case of a corporate entity, an authorized representative of the corporation 

who is not retained outside counsel must be present and must have discretionary authority to 

commit the company to pay an amount up to the amount of Plaintiff's prayer (excluding punitive 

damages prayers). The purpose of this requirement is to have representatives present who can 

settle the case during the course of the conference without consulting a superior. Counsel for 

a government entity may be excused from this requirement so long as the government attorney 

who attends the Settlement Conference (1) has primary responsibility for handling the case, and 

(2) may negotiate settlement offers which the attorney is willing to recommend to the 

government official having ultimate settlement authority.

c. Confidential Settlement Statements Required: No later than July 

25, 2016, the parties shall submit directly to Magistrate Judge Major's chambers (via hand 

delivery or email address) confidential settlement statements no more than ten (10) pages in 

 

1

“Full settlement authority” means that the individuals at the settlement conference must be 

authorized to explore settlement options fully and to agree at that time to any settlement terms 

acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th 

Cir. 1989). The person needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the 

settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Int'l, Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 

2003). The purpose of requiring a person with unlimited settlement authority to attend the 

conference contemplates that the person's view of the case may be altered during the face to 

face conference. Id. at 486. A limited or a sum certain of authority is not adequate. See Nick 

v. Morgan's Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595-97 (8th Cir. 2001).

Case 3:16-cv-00625-JLS-BLM Document 15 Filed 06/29/16 Page 2 of 3
3

16cv625-JLS (BLM)

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

length. These confidential statements shall not be filed or served on opposing 

counsel. Each party's confidential statement must set forth the party’s statement of the case, 

identify controlling legal issues, concisely set out issues of liability and damages, and shall set 

forth the party’s settlement position, including any previous settlement negotiations, mediation 

sessions, or mediation efforts, the last offer or demand made by that party, and a separate 

statement of the offer or demand the party is prepared to make at the settlement conference. 

If a specific demand or offer for settlement cannot be made at the time the brief is submitted, 

then the reasons therefore must be stated along with a statement as to when the party will be 

in a position to state a demand or make an offer.

General statements that a party will "negotiate in good faith" is not a specific demand 

or offer contemplated by this Order. It is assumed that all parties will negotiate in good faith.

d. Requests to Continue a Settlement Conference: Any request to 

continue the Settlement Conference or request for relief from any of the provisions or 

requirements of this Order must be sought by a written ex parte application. The application 

must (1) be supported by a declaration of counsel setting forth the reasons and justifications 

for the relief requested, (2) confirm compliance with Civil Local Rule 83.3(h), and (3) report the 

position of opposing counsel or any unrepresented parties subject to the Order. Absent good 

cause, requests for continuances will not be considered unless submitted in writing

no fewer than (7) days prior to the scheduled conference.

If the case is settled in its entirety before the scheduled date of the 

conference, counsel and any unrepresented parties must still appear in person, 

unless a written joint notice confirming the complete settlement of the case is filed 

no fewer than twenty-four (24) hours before the scheduled conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 6/29/2016

Case 3:16-cv-00625-JLS-BLM Document 15 Filed 06/29/16 Page 3 of 3