Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00277/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00277-3/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

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

KAREEM J. HOWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

N. VERA, I. MEDINA, I. CEBALLOS,

J.B. FUGATE, and J. NAVARRO,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:22-cv-00277-HBK (PC)

ORDER GRANTING MOTON FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME AND REFERRING 

CASE TO EARLY ADR AND STAY OF 

CASE 

(Doc. No. 19) 

DEADLINE TO OPT OUT DUE BY: 

MARCH 15, 2024 

Plaintiff Antonio Edwards is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis on 

his first amended complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 7). As set forth in 

the Court’s August 16, 2023, Screening Order, Plaintiff’s first amended complaint stated a First 

Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Vera, Medina, Ceballos, Fugate, and Navarro; 

an Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against Defendants Vera, Medina, Ceballos, 

Fugate, and Navarro; and an Eighth Amendment excessive use of force claim against Defendants 

Vera, Medina, Ceballos, Fugate, and Navarro. (Doc. No. 10). Defendants waived service and 

request an extension of time to file a responsive pleading. (Doc. Nos. 18, 19).

Case 1:22-cv-00277-KES-HBK Document 20 Filed 12/15/23 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

27

28

2

The Court refers all civil rights cases filed by pro se individuals to early Alternative 

Dispute Resolution (ADR) to try to resolve such cases more expeditiously and less expensively. 

See also Local Rule 270. In appropriate cases, defense counsel from the California Attorney

General’s Office have agreed to participate in early ADR. No claims, defenses, or objections are 

waived by the parties’ participation. 

Attempting to resolve this matter early through settlement now would save the parties the 

time and expense of engaging in lengthy and costly discovery and preparing substantive 

dispositive motions. The Court therefore will STAY this action for 90 DAYS to allow the parties 

an opportunity to investigate Plaintiff’s claims, meet and confer, and engage in settlement 

discussions, or agree to participate in an early settlement conference conducted by a magistrate 

judge. The Court presumes that all post-screening civil rights cases assigned to the undersigned 

will proceed to a settlement conference at some point. If after investigating Plaintiff’s claims and 

meeting and conferring, either party finds that a settlement conference would be a waste of 

resources, the party may opt out of the early settlement conference. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. This action will remain STAYED until further order to allow the parties an 

opportunity to settle their dispute. 

2. Defendants motion for extension of time (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED to the extent 

that Defendants may, but are not required, to file a response to the first amended complaint during 

the stay period. The parties may not file other pleadings or motions during the stay period. 

Further, the parties shall not engage in formal discovery until the Court issues a Scheduling and 

Discovery Order.

3. No later than March 15, 2024, the parties shall file a notice if they object to 

proceeding to an early settlement conference or if they believe that settlement is not currently 

achievable. 

4. If neither party has opted out of settlement by the expiration of the objection 

period, the Court will assign this matter by separate Order to a United States Magistrate Judge, 

other than the undersigned, for conducting the settlement conference. 

Case 1:22-cv-00277-KES-HBK Document 20 Filed 12/15/23 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

27

28

3

5. If the parties reach a settlement prior to the settlement conference, they SHALL 

file a Notice of Settlement as required by Local Rule 160 

6. The parties must keep the Court informed of their current addresses during the stay 

and the pendency of this action. Any changes of address must be reported promptly by filing a 

Notice of Change of Address with the Clerk of Court. See Local Rule 182(f). 

Dated: December 15, 2023 

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-00277-KES-HBK Document 20 Filed 12/15/23 Page 3 of 3