Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01722/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01722-11/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

JOE NINO,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. MUNOZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB (PC)

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE AND PROCEDURES

Plaintiff Joe Nino, appearing through counsel, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. §1983. The Court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement 

conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean to conduct 

a settlement conference on March 12, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. The settlement conference will be 

conducted by remote means, with all parties appearing by Zoom video conference. The Court 

will issue the necessary transportation order in due course. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This case is referred to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean for a settlement conference 

set for March 12, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. The settlement conference will be conducted by 

remote means, with all parties appearing by Zoom video conference. 

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

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 60 Filed 12/16/24 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

settlement on the defendants’ behalf shall attend in person1. Unless otherwise 

permitted in advance by the Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall appear at 

the settlement conference. It is recommended that pertinent evidence to be offered at 

trial, documents or otherwise, be brought to the settlement conference for presentation 

to the settlement judge. Neither the settlement conference statements nor 

communications during the settlement conference with the settlement judge can be 

used by either party in the trial of this case.

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. Absent permission from the Court, in 

addition to counsel who will try the case being present, the individual parties shall also 

be present. In the case of corporate parties, associations or other entities, and 

insurance carriers, a representative executive with authority to discuss, consider, 

propose and agree, or disagree, to any settlement proposal or offer shall also be 

present. A representative with unlimited authority shall either attend in person or be 

available by phone throughout the conference. In other words, having settlement 

authority “up to a certain amount” is not acceptable. IF ANY PARTY BELIEVES 

THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE FUTILE, THEN THAT 

PARTY SHALL CONTACT THE COURT NOT LATER THAN SEVENTY1 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. Pitman 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 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 60 Filed 12/16/24 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

TWO HOURS PRECEDING THE SCHEDULED SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE.

4. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than March 5, 

2025, to epgorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement 

statement Attn: Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean, USDC CAED, 2500 Tulare 

Street, Room 1501, Fresno, California 93721, so it arrives no later than March 5, 

2025. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT 

STATEMENT.” Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of 

Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).

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. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and 

trial.

d. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a 

history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.

e. A brief statement of the party’s expectations and goals for the settlement 

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 60 Filed 12/16/24 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

conference, including how much the party is willing to accept and/or willing to 

pay.

f. If the parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims 

not in this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above, 

including case number(s) if applicable.

5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office 

at Kern Valley State Prison via facsimile at (661) 720-4949 or via email.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 16, 2024 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 60 Filed 12/16/24 Page 4 of 4