Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01113/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01113-59/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

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

SERGIO ALEJANDRO GAMEZ,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

F. GONZALEZ, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:08-cv-01113-EPG-PC

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ 

REQUEST TO REINSTATE ORIGINAL 

DATE AND JUDGE FOR SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

(ECF No. 227.)

On February 3, 2016, defense counsel filed a Waiver of Disqualification of Settlement 

Judge pursuant to Local Rule 270(b) after the Court’s deadline, with a declaration explaining 

that it was simple oversight and asking that the original date and settlement conference judge 

be reinstated. (ECF No. 227.) The Court declines to do so and confirms by this order that the 

settlement conference will go forward before Judge Thurston on February 18, 2016 at 10:00 

a.m. in Courtroom 6. (ECF No. 222.) 

Whether inadvertent or not, defendants did not submit their Waiver by either the first 

deadline ordered by the Court or the second deadline permitted by the Court after defendants 

failed to file their waiver on time. A settlement conference before Judge Thurston has now 

been set on February 18 and the judges have scheduled their matters accordingly. Additionally, 

the initial writ to transport Plaintiff for the settlement conference has been withdrawn and a 

Case 1:08-cv-01113-EPG Document 228 Filed 02/05/16 Page 1 of 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

new one issued and confirmed with the prison. At this point, it is inefficient and inconvenient 

to change the date and presiding judge. 

It goes without saying that Magistrate Judge Thurston is more than able to handle this 

settlement conference and the difference in judges presiding should not be prejudicial to either 

party.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ request for the Court to 

reinstate the original date and judge for the settlement conference is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 4, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-01113-EPG Document 228 Filed 02/05/16 Page 2 of 2