Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00456/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00456-56/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

DANIEL MANRIQUEZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

J. HUCHINS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:09-cv-00456-BAM PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST 

FOR ASSISTANCE TO OBTAIN 

AGREEMENT/CONTRACT FOR SIGNING 

AND PAYMENT AS MOOT (ECF No. 360)

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO 

FILE A RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL 

INTERVENTION/ASSISTANCE RE: 

SETTLEMENT CONTRACT, AND 

REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE CALL (ECF 

No. 362)

TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. On March 31, 2014, the parties participated in a settlement conference before the 

Honorable Kendall J. Newman. During the conference, the parties reached a verbal settlement 

agreement and the terms of the settlement were read into the record. 

On May 27, 2014, Plaintiff filed a request for assistance to obtain the settlement 

agreement. Plaintiff reported that he had been transferred and had not yet received a copy of the 

written settlement agreement for signature. (ECF No. 360.) Defendants did not respond to the 

motion.

Subsequently, on June 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for judicial 

Case 1:09-cv-00456-BAM Document 363 Filed 06/20/14 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

intervention/assistance regarding the settlement conference and a request for a conference. 

Plaintiff reports that he received a written settlement agreement and release forms from defense 

counsel, but essentially contends that the proposed settlement agreement does not reflect the 

terms agreed upon by the parties at the settlement conference. (ECF No. 362.)

Based on Plaintiff’s representation that he received a copy of the settlement agreement 

and release forms from defense counsel, his May 27, 2014 motion seeking assistance in obtaining 

a copy of the agreement is now moot and shall be denied. However, the Court finds it appropriate 

to direct Defendants to file a response to Plaintiff’s June 19, 2014 regarding the written settlement 

agreement. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s request for assistance to obtain the settlement agreement, filed on May 27, 

2014, is DENIED as moot; and

2. Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiff’s request for judicial 

intervention/assistance, filed on June 19, 2014, within twenty-one (21) days of the date 

of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 19, 2014 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00456-BAM Document 363 Filed 06/20/14 Page 2 of 2