Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-01427/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-01427-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Sean Ryan,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 13cv1427-BEN (JLB)

Order Setting Mandatory Settlement

Conference 

[ECF No. 42]

vs.

Jersey Mike’s Franchise Systems, et

al.,

Defendant.

The Court hereby SETS a Mandatory Settlement Conference date for this action. 

A Mandatory Settlement Conference shall be conducted on December 11, 2014 at 

2:30 p.m. in the Chambers of Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt, Edward J. Schwartz

U.S. Courthouse, 221 West Broadway, Suite 5140, San Diego, California 92101. 

Pursuant to Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules, counsel shall LODGE

confidential settlement statements directly with Judge Burkhardt’s chambers no later

than December 4, 2014. Absent good cause, requests for continuances will not be

considered unless submitted in writing no less than seven calendar days prior to the

scheduled conference. Each party’s settlement statement shall set forth the information

required by Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules (available on the Court’s web

site). The settlement statements shall not be filed with the Clerk of the Court.

/ / / 

/ / /

- 1 - 13cv1427

Case 3:13-cv-01427-BEN-JLB Document 55 Filed 05/08/14 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

Personal Appearance of Parties Required: All parties, adjusters for insured

defendants, and other representatives of a party having full settlement authority as

explained below, and the principal attorneys responsible for the litigation, must be

present in person and legally and factually prepared to discuss settlement of the case. 

Counsel appearing without their clients (whether or not counsel has been given

settlement authority) will be cause for immediate imposition ofsanctions and may also

result in the immediate termination of the conference.

Unless there are extraordinary circumstances, persons required to attend the

conference pursuant to this Order shall not be excused from personal attendance. 

Requests for excuse from attendance for extraordinary circumstances shall be made in

writing at least seven days prior to the conference. Failure to appear at the settlement

conference will be grounds for sanctions.

Full Settlement Authority Required: In addition to counsel who will try the

case, a party or party representative with full settlement authority must be present for

the conference. In the case of a corporate entity, an authorized representative of the

corporation who is not retained outside counsel must be present and must have

discretionary authority to commit the company to pay an amount up to the amount of

the Plaintiff’s prayer (excluding punitive damages prayers). The purpose of this

requirement isto have representatives present who can settle the case during the course

of the conference without consulting a superior. 

“Full settlement authority” means that the individuals at the settlement

conference must be authorized to explore settlement options fully and to agree at that

time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co. v. Joseph

Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989). The individuals need to have “unfettered

discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v.

Brinker Int’l, Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose of requiring

a person with unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference contemplatesthat

/ / /

- 2 - 13cv1427

Case 3:13-cv-01427-BEN-JLB Document 55 Filed 05/08/14 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

the party’s view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Id. at

486. A limited or a sum certain of authority is not adequate. See Nick v. Morgan’s

Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595-97 (8th Cir. 2001). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 8, 2014

JILL L. BURKHARDT

United States Magistrate Judge

- 3 - 13cv1427

Case 3:13-cv-01427-BEN-JLB Document 55 Filed 05/08/14 Page 3 of 3