Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00314/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00314-4/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NICHOLAS D. FLORES,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. JOHNSON, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:19-cv-0314-JAM-DMC-P

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from another settlement conference. 

Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney to conduct a 

settlement conference on June 16, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be conducted 

by remote means, to be determined at a later date and time. 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 set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. 

Delaney on June 16, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. The settlement conference will be conducted 

by remote means, to be determined at a later date and time. 

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

Case 2:19-cv-00314-JAM-DMC Document 36 Filed 04/14/20 Page 1 of 3
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 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 settle1.

3. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than June 9, 

2020 to ckdorders@caed.uscourts.gov. 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 9, 2020. 

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.

 

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 2:19-cv-00314-JAM-DMC Document 36 Filed 04/14/20 Page 2 of 3
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

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, including how much a party is willing to accept and/or willing to pay.

h. 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.

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

at California State Prison, Sacramento, via facsimile at (916) 294-3072.

5. The deadlines set in the court’s March 25, 2020, order for submission of pre-trial 

status reports are hereby vacated.

Dated: April 14, 2020

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-00314-JAM-DMC Document 36 Filed 04/14/20 Page 3 of 3