Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01936/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01936-4/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 

CHRISTIAN GUZMAN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

D. JONES, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:20-cv-1936 KJM AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights 

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed November 5, 2021, this case was 

referred to the court’s Post-Screening ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) Project and stayed 

for a period of 120 days. ECF No. 26. That order provided defendants thirty days to request 

opting out of the ADR Project based on a good faith belief that a settlement conference would be 

a waste of resources. Id. at 2. Although the thirty-day deadline has passed, defendants now 

request to opt out of the Post-Screening ADR Project on the ground that new developments have 

led defense counsel to believe an early settlement conference would not be productive. ECF No. 

28. Having reviewed the request, the court finds good cause to grant it.1 

1

 Counsel for defendant is advised that in the future, any motion to opt out should affirm that 

counsel has taken all steps outlined in the order referring the case to the Post-Screening ADR 

Project, including conferring with their supervisor. 

Case 2:20-cv-01936-DAD-AC Document 29 Filed 01/19/22 Page 1 of 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 

2 

 Defendants further request that they be granted at least 120 days to file a responsive 

pleading due to “the current public-health crisis, the additional burdens on the prison and staff 

during this pandemic, and the anticipated delay in deposing Plaintiff due to the pandemic.” ECF 

No. 28 at 2. The court does not find that these grounds justify such a prolonged deadline.2 

Defendants shall be granted thirty days to file a responsive pleading and may seek an extension of 

that time should it become necessary. 

 Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants’ request to opt out of the Post-Screening ADR Project, ECF No. 28, is 

GRANTED. 

2. The stay of this action, commencing November 5, 2021, ECF No. 26, is LIFTED. 

3. The March 17, 2022 settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. 

Newman is VACATED. 

4. Within thirty days of the filing of this order, defendants shall file a response to the 

complaint. 

DATED: January 18, 2022 

2

 This is particularly true of the need to depose plaintiff, as the schedule for discovery has yet to 

be set and it is unclear why defendants would need to depose plaintiff prior to filing a responsive 

pleading. 

Case 2:20-cv-01936-DAD-AC Document 29 Filed 01/19/22 Page 2 of 2