Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00725/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00725-0/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

JESSE WASHINGTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

P. ROUCH, et al.,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:15-cv-00725-DAD-BAM (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S EX 

PARTE REQUEST FOR PRETRIAL 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

(ECF No. 18)

Plaintiff Jesse Washington (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case currently proceeds on 

Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate indifference to his medical needs against 

Defendants Rouch and Sisodia. On July 8, 2015, Plaintiff declined to proceed before a United 

States Magistrate Judge. (ECF No. 8.) This matter was then referred to the undersigned pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for a pretrial settlement conference 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, filed October 24, 2016. (ECF No. 18.) Plaintiff 

asserts that he believes the case can be resolved if the court orders a settlement conference with 

both parties. Plaintiff also states that he has sent a letter to defense counsel on this matter, and he 

filed a notice of that letter with part of the letter attached with the Court. (ECF No. 19.)

Plaintiff’s motion is denied. Certainly, the parties are encouraged to engage in good faith 

settlement negotiations, to the extent they deem necessary. Should the parties jointly agree that 

Case 1:15-cv-00725-DAD-BAM Document 22 Filed 11/28/16 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

they require the assistance of the Court with any settlement negotiations, defense counsel may 

contact Courtroom Deputy, Harriet Herman, for assistance with scheduling a settlement 

conference. Since Plaintiff’s request for a settlement conference was made ex parte, without the 

agreement of Defendants, it will be denied at this time.

Furthermore, the parties are informed that they need not file any evidence, notices, or 

copies of letters containing any settlement discussions with the Court. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a pretrial settlement 

conference, filed October 24, 2016 (ECF No. 18), is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 28, 2016 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00725-DAD-BAM Document 22 Filed 11/28/16 Page 2 of 2