Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01878/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01878-24/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

MARIO NAVARRO,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEBRA HERNDON, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:09-cv-1878 KJM KJN P

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a 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 Carolyn K. Delaney to 

conduct a settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California

95814 in Courtroom #24 on June 24, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. 

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

this order.

In light of the upcoming settlement conference, the current deadline for filing objections 

to the March 25, 2016 findings and recommendations will be vacated. In the event that this case 

is not resolved at the settlement conference, the parties will have fourteen days following the 

settlement conference to file objections to the March 25, 2016 findings and recommendations.

////

Case 2:09-cv-01878-KJM-KJN Document 184 Filed 04/06/16 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

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

1. A settlement conference has been set for June 24, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., in Courtroom 

#24 before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney at the U. S. District Court, 501 I 

Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

2. 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.

1

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

address: ckdorders@caed.uscourts.gov not later than June 17, 2016. Plaintiff shall 

mail his confidential settlement statement Attn: Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. 

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

arrives no later than June 17, 2016. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL 

 

1 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 2:09-cv-01878-KJM-KJN Document 184 Filed 04/06/16 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 CONFERENCE STATEMENT.” If a party desires to share 

additional confidential information with the Court, they may do so pursuant to the 

provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e). 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. 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.

////

////

////

Case 2:09-cv-01878-KJM-KJN Document 184 Filed 04/06/16 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

4. The deadline to file objections to the March 25, 2016 findings and recommendations is 

vacated. If this case is not resolved at the settlement conference, the parties shall have 

fourteen (14) days following the settlement conference to file objections to the March 

25, 2016 findings and recommendations.

Dated: April 6, 2016

/nava1878.med

Case 2:09-cv-01878-KJM-KJN Document 184 Filed 04/06/16 Page 4 of 4