Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00919/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00919-51/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

Plaintiff David Estrada (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 

in this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint on August 7, 2013. Pursuant to 

the Court’s screening order and Plaintiff’s notice of willingness to proceed on the cognizable claims, 

this action is proceeding against (1) Defendants Gipson and Espinosa for retaliation in violation of the 

First Amendment; and (2) Defendants Gipson, Espinosa, Lambert and Cavazos for violation of the 

Eighth Amendment. 

Discovery closed on December 15, 2014. Numerous motions to compel are pending.

On December 8, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for a Court-ordered settlement.

The Court ordered Defendants to respond to the motion. On December 23, 2014, Defendants 

indicated that while they intend to move for summary judgment and do not anticipate making a 

DAVID ESTRADA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

GIPSON, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:13cv00919 LJO DLB (PC)

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

(Document 129)

Case 1:13-cv-00919-LJO-DLB Document 142 Filed 01/06/15 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

substantive settlement offer, the case may be settled for a nominal amount. Defendants suggested that 

Plaintiff provide them directly with a settlement demand.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion IN PART. Plaintiff SHALL provide a 

settlement demand, directly to Defendants’ counsel, within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service 

of this order. The demand should not be filed with the Court. Defendants SHALL respond to the 

demand within fourteen days (14) of receipt.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 5, 2015 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00919-LJO-DLB Document 142 Filed 01/06/15 Page 2 of 2