Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01722/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01722-10/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOE NINO,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. MUNOZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB (PC)

ORDER REFERRING CASE TO POSTSCREENING ADR AND STAYING CASE 

FOR 90 DAYS

FORTY-FIVE (45) DAY DEADLINE 

Plaintiff Joe Nino, appearing through counsel, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants Carillo, Escarcega, Harris, Masferrer, and Munoz answered 

Plaintiff’s operative fourth amended complaint on July 13, 2023. On September 30, 2024, District 

Judge Kirk E. Sherriff issued his Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations to Grant 

Defendant Sullivan’s Motion to Dismiss. This action now proceeds against Defendants Carillo, 

Escarcega, Harris, Masferrer, and Munoz.

The Court refers all civil rights cases to Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) to 

attempt to resolve such cases more expeditiously and less expensively. 

The Court stays this action for ninety days to allow the parties to investigate Plaintiff’s 

claims, meet and confer, and participate in an early settlement conference. The Court presumes 

that all post-screening civil rights cases assigned to the undersigned will proceed to a settlement 

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 55 Filed 10/01/24 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

conference. However, if, after investigating Plaintiff’s claims and meeting and conferring, either 

party finds that a settlement conference would be a waste of resources, the party may opt out of 

the early settlement conference. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. This action is STAYED for ninety (90) days to allow the parties an opportunity to 

settle their dispute before the discovery process begins. No pleadings or motions may 

be filed in this case during the stay. The parties shall not engage in formal discovery, 

but they may engage in informal discovery to prepare for the settlement conference.

2. Within 45 days from the date of this Order, the parties SHALL file the attached 

notice, indicating their agreement to proceed to an early settlement conference or their 

belief that settlement is not achievable at this time.

3. Within 60 days from the date of this Order, the assigned Deputy Attorney General 

SHALL contact the undersigned’s Courtroom Deputy Clerk at 

cborin@caed.uscourts.gov to schedule the settlement conference, assuming the parties 

agree to participate in an early settlement conference.

4. If the parties reach a settlement during the stay of this action, they SHALL file a 

Notice of Settlement as required by Local Rule 160.

5. The Clerk of the Court SHALL serve via email copies of Plaintiff’s fourth amended 

complaint (Doc. 46), the Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations to Grant 

Defendant Sullivan’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 54), and this Order to Supervising 

Deputy Attorney General Lawrence Bragg (Lawrence.Bragg@doj.ca.gov), and a copy 

of this Order to ADR Coordinator Sujean Park.

Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 55 Filed 10/01/24 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

6. The parties are obligated to keep the Court informed of their current addresses during 

the stay and the pendency of this action. Changes of address must be reported 

promptly in a Notice of Change of Address. See L.R. 182(f).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 1, 2024 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 55 Filed 10/01/24 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOE NINO,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. MUNOZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-0722-KES-CDB

NOTICE REGARDING EARLY 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

1. The party or counsel agrees that an early settlement conference would be productive and 

wishes to engage in an early settlement conference.

Yes ____ No ____

2. Check one:

_____ would like to participate in the settlement conference in person.

_____ would like to participate in the settlement conference by telephone or video 

conference.

Dated:

________________________________

Counsel for Plaintiff or Defendants

Case 1:20-cv-01722-KES-CDB Document 55 Filed 10/01/24 Page 4 of 4