Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01339/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01339-9/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUAN LEWIS GALLARDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. RAINWATER, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-1339 CKD P

ORDER SETTING 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in 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 set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on April 15, 

2016 at 10:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 in 

Courtroom #24. 

Parties will be required to file a signed Waiver of Disqualification (attached below), no 

later than March 18, 2016.

1

 

A separate order and writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue concurrently with 

this order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

 

1

If the parties do not waive disqualification the settlement conference will be reset before another 

magistrate judge, but will not necessarily occur on the date currently set.

Case 2:14-cv-01339-CKD Document 51 Filed 03/03/16 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

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. 

Delaney on April 15, 2016, at 10:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, 

Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #24.

2. Parties are required to file a signed Waiver of Disqualification, no later than March 18, 

2016. 

3. Parties are instructed to have a principal with full settlement authority present at the 

Settlement Conference or to be fully authorized to settle the matter on any terms. The 

individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and 

authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. 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. 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.

2

4. Each party shall provide a confidential settlement statement to the following email 

address: ckdorders@caed.uscourts not later than April 8, 2016 and file a Notice of 

Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement (See L.R. 270(d)). Plaintiff shall 

mail his confidential settlement statement to Sujean Park, ADR & Pro Bono Program 

Director, USDC CAED, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 95814 so it 

arrives no later than April 8, 2016. The envelope shall be marked “Confidential 

 

2 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 2:14-cv-01339-CKD Document 51 Filed 03/03/16 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

Settlement Statement”.

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. 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: March 3, 2016

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-01339-CKD Document 51 Filed 03/03/16 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUAN LEWIS GALLARDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. RAINWATER, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-1339 CKD P

WAIVER OF DISQUALIFICATION

Under Local Rule 270(b) of the Eastern District of California, the parties to the 

herein action affirmatively request that Magistrate Judge Delaney participate in the settlement 

conference scheduled for April 15, 2016. To the extent the parties consent to trial of the case 

before the assigned Magistrate Judge, they waive any claim of disqualification to the assigned 

Magistrate Judge trying the case thereafter. 

 

Dated:_____________

By: 

 Plaintiff

Dated:_________________

 

By: 

 Attorney for defendants

Case 2:14-cv-01339-CKD Document 51 Filed 03/03/16 Page 4 of 4