Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01445/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01445-5/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

TANIA BORJA,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

K. WILLIAMS, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:13-cv-01445-DAD-GSA-PC

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO 

NOTIFY COURT WHETHER A 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD 

BE BENEFICIAL

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Tania Borja (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

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

on September 10, 2013. (ECF No. 1.) The action now proceeds on Plaintiff’s March 31, 2014, 

First Amended Complaint for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against 

Defendant K. Williams. (ECF No. 8.)

On February 5, 2015, the Court issued a Discovery/Scheduling Order in this action, 

establishing a deadline July 6, 2015 for the parties to conduct discovery, and a deadline of 

September 3, 2015 for the filing of dispositive motions. (ECF No. 16.) The pretrial deadlines 

have now expired. On November 21, 2016, the Court denied in part Defendants’ motion for 

summary judgment. (ECF No. 40.) At this stage of the proceedings, the Court ordinarily 

proceeds to schedule the case for trial.

Case 1:13-cv-01445-DAD-GSA Document 41 Filed 11/30/16 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.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 29, 2016 /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 1:13-cv-01445-DAD-GSA Document 41 Filed 11/30/16 Page 2 of 2