Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00878/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00878-38/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLES T. DAVIS, No. 2:04-cv-0878 GEB DAD P

Plaintiff, 

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT

vs. CONFERENCE BEFORE THE

HONORABLE GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

C/O KISSINGER, et al.,

Date: October 23, 2012

Defendants. Time: 9:00 a.m.

Location: Courtroom #9

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 2, 2012, a settlement conference was ordered

in this case to take place on September 25, 2012 before United States Magistrate Judge Gregory

G. Hollows. Thereafter, on September 11, 2012, defendants filed a motion seeking to modify the

August 2, 2012 order to reschedule the settlement conference date. Good cause appearing,

defendants’ motion to reschedule the settlement conference date will be granted. 

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. The motion to modify the August 2, 2012 order is GRANTED and the August

2, 2012 order (Doc. No. 212) is VACATED.

1

Case 2:04-cv-00878-TLN-DAD Document 216 Filed 09/14/12 Page 1 of 3
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

2. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Gregory G.

Hollows on October 23, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. at the U.S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento,

California 95814, in Courtroom #9.

3. Defense counsel and a person with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and

enter into a binding settlement on defendant’s behalf shall attend the settlement conference in

person. 

1

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, under those circumstances the

conference will not proceed and will be reset to another date.

5. Plaintiff has served his settlement demand letter on defendants. (See Doc. No.

214 at p. 4.) Accordingly, no later than October 12, 2012, defendants shall respond, by

telephone or in person, with an acceptance of the offer or with a meaningful counteroffer which

includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate.

6. If settlement is not achieved, each party shall provide a confidential settlement

conference statement to Sujean Park, ADR Coordinator, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento,

California 95814, so they arrive no later than October 18, 2012 and file a Notice of

Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement (See L.R. 270(d)); settlement

 The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the settlement 1

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).

2

Case 2:04-cv-00878-TLN-DAD Document 216 Filed 09/14/12 Page 2 of 3
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

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.

DATED: September 13, 2012.

DAD:dpw

DAD1/prisoner-civil rights/davi0878.med(2)

3

Case 2:04-cv-00878-TLN-DAD Document 216 Filed 09/14/12 Page 3 of 3