Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01411/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01411-3/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

JAMES WASHINGTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANTHONY SWANSON, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01411-MJS (PC)

ORDER CONTINUING SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

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

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 5, 2015, the case was set for a 

settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin, to occur on June 4, 

2015. The Court has learned that plaintiff has a scheduling conflict and is unavailable to 

participate in a settlement conference on June 4, 2015. Therefore, the settlement 

conference in this case will be continued to July 23, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. before 

Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, 

California 93721 in Courtroom #10.

A separate amended 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. The settlement conference currently set in this case for June 4, 2015 is 

Case 1:14-cv-01411-LJO-MJS Document 22 Filed 05/12/15 Page 1 of 4
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

continued to July 23, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Gary S. 

Austin at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California 93721 

in Courtroom #10.

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

binding settlement on the defendants’ behalf shall attend in person.1

3. 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.

4. The parties are directed to submit their confidential settlement conference 

statements to the court using the following email address: 

gsaorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement 

statement addressed to Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin, USDC CAED, 2500 

Tulare Street, Room 1501, Fresno, CA 93721. The envelope shall be marked 

“Confidential Settlement Statement.” If a party desires to share additional 

confidential information with the court, they may do so pursuant to the 

provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e). Upon submission of confidential 

settlement statements, each party shall file on the docket a “Notice of 

Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement.” Statements are due at 

 

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. Pittman 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 1:14-cv-01411-LJO-MJS Document 22 Filed 05/12/15 Page 2 of 4
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

least 7 days prior to the settlement conference. 

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: May 11, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01411-LJO-MJS Document 22 Filed 05/12/15 Page 3 of 4
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

Case 1:14-cv-01411-LJO-MJS Document 22 Filed 05/12/15 Page 4 of 4