Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00914/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00914-21/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

NICOLAS MORAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

K. DUTRA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS (PC)

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court has determined that this 

case will benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be set for a 

settlement conference before the undersigned to occur at the U.S. District Court, 2500 

Tulare Street, Fresno, California 93721 in Courtroom #6 on July 1, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.

Parties will be required to file a signed Waiver of Disqualification (attached below), 

no later than May 20, 2016. 

A separate order and writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue 

concurrently with this order.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before the undersigned to occur

Case 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS Document 151 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 5
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

on July 1, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, 

Fresno, California 93721 in Courtroom #6.

2. Parties are required to file a signed Waiver of Disqualification, or in the 

alternative, file a request that another randomly assigned Magistrate Judge 

conduct the settlement conference, no later than May 20, 2016. 

3. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a 

binding settlement shall attend in person1.

4. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and 

damages. The failure of any counsel, party, or authorized person subject to 

this order to appear in person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In 

addition, the conference will not proceed and will be reset to another date.

5. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than 

June 24, 2016, to the following email address: mjsorders@caed.uscourts.gov. 

Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement statement to Sujean Park, ADR & 

Pro Bono Program Director, USDC CAED, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, 

Sacramento, California 95814 so it arrives no later than June 24, 2016. The 

envelope shall be marked “Confidential Settlement Statement.” Parties are 

also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement 

Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).

 

1 While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has the 

authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement 

conferences... .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 

1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2012) (“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in 

mandatory settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals 

attending the mediation conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at 

that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat 

Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989), cited with approval in Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F.3d 

1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993). The individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion 

and authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 

216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003), amended on recon. in part, Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 2003 WL 

23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement

authority is that the parties’ view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Pitman, 

216 F.R.D. at 486. An authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to 

comply with the requirement of full authority to settle. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596-97 

(8th Cir. 2001).

Case 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS Document 151 Filed 04/25/16 Page 2 of 5
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

Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor 

served on any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked 

“confidential” with the date and time of the settlement conference indicated 

prominently thereon.

The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in 

length, typed or neatly printed, and include the following:

a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.

b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other 

grounds upon which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the 

parties’ likelihood of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a 

description of the major issues in dispute.

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, 

pretrial, and trial.

e. The relief sought.

f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers 

and a history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.

g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement 

conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 22, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS Document 151 Filed 04/25/16 Page 3 of 5
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

NICOLAS MORAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

K. DUTRA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS (PC)

WAIVER OF DISQUALIFICATION

Under Local Rule 270(b) of the Eastern District of California, the parties to the 

herein action affirmatively request that Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng participate in 

the settlement conference scheduled for July 1, 2016. To the extent the parties consent 

to trial of the case before the assigned Magistrate Judge, they waive any claim of 

Case 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS Document 151 Filed 04/25/16 Page 4 of 5
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 5

disqualification to the assigned Magistrate Judge trying the case thereafter. 

 

By: 

 Plaintiff

Dated:_________________ 

By: 

 Attorney for defendants

Dated:_________________

Case 1:11-cv-00914-LJO-MJS Document 151 Filed 04/25/16 Page 5 of 5