Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00101/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00101-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 15:1126 Patent Infringement

---

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

This matter has been set for a settlement conference on December 2, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. in 

Courtroom 6 at the Robert E. Coyle Federal Courthouse, located at 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, 

California. (Doc. 25) Therefore, the Court ORDERS:

1. Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall 

appear at the Settlement Conference with the parties and the person or persons having full authority to 

negotiate and settle the case on any terms1at the conference. Consideration of settlement is a serious 

matter that requires preparation prior to the settlement conference. Set forth below are the procedures 

the Court will employ, absent good cause, in conducting the conference:

 

1

Insurance carriers, business organizations, and governmental bodies or agencies whose settlement agreements 

are subject to approval by legislative bodies, executive committees, boards of directors or the like shall be represented by 

a person or persons who occupy high executive positions in the party organization and who will be directly involved in 

the process of approval of any settlement offers or agreements. To the extent possible, the representative shall have the 

authority, if he or she deems it appropriate, to settle the action on terms consistent with the opposing party’s most recent 

demand.

INTERNATIONAL FRUIT GENETICS,

 Plaintiff,

v.

R.B. SANDRINI, INC. , et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-00101 MCE JLT

ORDER RE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

Case 1:15-cv-00101-MCE-JLT Document 26 Filed 08/20/15 Page 1 of 3
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

a. At least 21 days before the settlement conference, Plaintiff SHALL submit to 

Defendant via fax or e-mail, a written itemization of damages and a meaningful settlement 

demand which includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate;

b. Thereafter, no later than 14 days before the settlement conference, Defendant 

SHALL respond, via fax or e-mail, with an acceptance of the offer or with a meaningful2

counteroffer, which includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate. 

c. If settlement is not achieved, each party SHALL attach copies of their 

settlement offers to their Confidential Settlement Conference Statement, as described below. 

Copies of these documents shall not be filed on the court docket.

d. At least five court days before the Settlement Conference, the parties shall 

submit, directly to Judge Thurston’s chambers by e-mail to JLTOrders@caed.uscourts.gov, a 

Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. The statement should not be filed with the 

Clerk of the Court nor served on any other party, although the parties may file a Notice of 

Lodging of Settlement Conference Statement. Each statement shall be clearly marked 

“confidential” with the date and time of the Settlement Conference indicated prominently 

thereon;

e. The Confidential Settlement Conference Statement shall 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, 

 

2

“Meaningful” means that the offer is reasonably calculated to settle the case on terms acceptable to the offering 

party. “Meaningful” does not include an offer which the offering party knows will not be acceptable to the other party. If, 

however, the offering party is only willing to offer a settlement which it knows the other party will not accept, this should

trigger a recognition the case is not in a settlement posture and the parties should confer about continuing or vacating the 

settlement conference via stipulation. This obligation will be strictly enforced and a party’s failure to comply will be 

grounds for the imposition of sanctions.

Case 1:15-cv-00101-MCE-JLT Document 26 Filed 08/20/15 Page 2 of 3
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

27

28

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.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 20, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00101-MCE-JLT Document 26 Filed 08/20/15 Page 3 of 3