Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00249/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00249-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
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

ALLAN FLETCHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLENDENIN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:22-cv-00249-JLT-BAM (PC)

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ 

NOTICE OF OPT-OUT AND REQUEST TO 

VACATE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

(ECF No. 37)

ORDER LIFTING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

ORDER VACATING OCTOBER 18, 2023

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

(ECF No. 36)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 

ISSUE DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING 

ORDER AND CONSENT/DECLINE FORM

Plaintiff Allan Fletcher (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Individuals detained pursuant to 

the California Welfare and Institutions Code § 6600 et seq. are considered civil detainees and are 

not prisoners within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 

1136, 1140 (9th Cir. 2000). This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against 

Defendants Clendenin and Price for failure to treat Plaintiff under the Fourteenth Amendment 

Due Process Clause due to their official policy.

On August 18, 2023, the Court identified this case as an appropriate case for the postscreening ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) project, and stayed the action to allow the 

Case 1:22-cv-00249-JLT-BAM Document 38 Filed 09/18/23 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

parties an opportunity to settle their dispute before the discovery process begins. (ECF No. 36.) 

The Court’s order granted Defendants time to investigate and determine whether to opt out of the 

post-screening ADR project.

On September 15, 2023, Defendants filed a notice of opt-out and request to vacate

settlement conference. (ECF No. 37.) After speaking with Plaintiff and investigating Plaintiff’s 

claims, Defendants conclude in good faith that a settlement conference in this case would be a 

waste of resources. (Id.) Therefore, the stay is lifted, and the October 18, 2023, settlement 

conference is vacated. This case is now ready to proceed.

If the parties wish to set a settlement conference with the Court at a later date, they should 

so inform the Court. However, the parties are also reminded that they are not precluded from 

negotiating a settlement without judicial assistance.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The stay of this action, (ECF No. 36), is LIFTED;

2. The October 18, 2023 settlement conference is VACATED;

3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to issue a discovery and scheduling order

and a consent/decline form to the parties; and

4. The parties may proceed with discovery pursuant to the discovery and scheduling 

order to be issued by separate order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 18, 2023 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-00249-JLT-BAM Document 38 Filed 09/18/23 Page 2 of 2