Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01557/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01557-4/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

ANDRE KENNETH STUCKEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. JUAREZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:18-cv-01557-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO APPEAR VIA TELEPHONE AT THE 

FEBRUARY 20, 2020 SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE 

(ECF No. 26)

Plaintiff Andre Kenneth Stuckey is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on 

Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against Defendants Chanelo and Peacock for violation of 

the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (ECF No. 18.)

This case is currently set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. 

McAuliffe on February 20, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. at the United States Courthouse located at 2500 

Tulare Street, Fresno, California. (ECF No. 24.)

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to appear via telephone at the settlement 

conference, filed on December 30, 2019. (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff states that he will not be able to 

physically appear at the settlement conference because he is a currently enrolled full-time college 

student at the College of the Redwoods, which offers on-site classes at Pelican Bay State Prison. 

Plaintiff asserts that, if he is forced to physically attend the scheduled settlement conference in the 

Case 1:18-cv-01557-SAB Document 27 Filed 01/02/20 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

2

middle of the Spring college semester, it will negatively affect his grades.

Generally, the Court allows inmates to appear telephonically for pretrial proceedings; 

however, the Court finds that settlement conferences are not productive without the ability to 

have face-to-face contact with the participants. Therefore, the Court requires the parties to 

personally appear for settlement conferences. The Court’s past experience has demonstrated that 

the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s telephone and/or video 

conferencing system can be unreliable; and, thus, it is insufficient for the purposes of conducting 

a settlement conference. Consequently, the Court finds that it is not practicable to allow an 

inmate to appear by telephone at a settlement conference. 

Plaintiff is advised that, unless he chooses to dismiss his lawsuit, he is obligated to litigate 

this action, which may necessitate, among other things, transportation from his institution to the 

court or other locations for proceedings at which Defendants may be present. Plaintiff will only 

be re-housed for a short period of time to accommodate the settlement conference. In addition, 

the settlement conference is scheduled for February 20, 2020, which means that Plaintiff will 

have plenty of time after the scheduled settlement conference to complete his Spring semester 

college coursework before the Spring semester ends in May 2020. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to appear via telephone at the February 20, 2020 

settlement conference, (ECF No. 26), is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 2, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-01557-SAB Document 27 Filed 01/02/20 Page 2 of 2