Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_00-cv-01216/USCOURTS-casd-3_00-cv-01216-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)

---

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 - 00cv1216

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEBORAH LEBEL,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 00cv1216-LAB

ORDER RE RESPONSE

vs.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of the

Department of Homeland Security,

Defendant.

In response to the court's Order requiring the parties to meet and confer regarding

plaintiff's January 2008 contention defendants failed to fulfill certain provisions of the parties'

March 2002 Settlement Agreement in this action, they have filed a Joint Submission. They

explain the nature of the controversy surrounding agency review of its handling of plaintiff's

workers' compensation claims giving rise to her original Complaint and certain logistical

problems associated with obtaining the documentation necessary to make computations

necessary to fulfill the Settlement Agreement terms plaintiff contends were not fulfilled so

long after the fact. 

The undersigned District Judge presided over the settlement negotiations while

serving as a Magistrate Judge, and retained jurisdiction to arbitrate any disputes arising from

the Settlement Agreement, with the consent of the parties. The parties inform the court they

are in the process now of gathering the necessary documentation, to the extent it may still

exist. Defendant will review those documents to ascertain whether the agency correctly

Case 3:00-cv-01216-LAB Document 30 Filed 03/05/08 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 - 00cv1216

reported plaintiff's injuries and income, and will communicate its position to plaintiff in writing

thereafter, followed by another meet and confer conference to determine whether plaintiff

still desires the court's review of any disparities in their positions. If so, the parties propose

to obtain a briefing schedule from the court for submission of their respective positions for

its decision. 

The Joint Submission permits the inference the process of ascertaining whether court

intervention is desired may reasonably be completed by mid-April 2008. In consideration of

the fact the settlement in this action occurred six years ago, defendant's relevant review and

calculation obligations under the Settlement Agreement were to have been performed within

six months of the execution of the Settlement Agreement, and plaintiff has approached the

court so belatedly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the parties shall inform the court on or before

April 21, 2008 whether they have an actual dispute arising from the Settlement Agreement

or not. If so, the court will accept the parties' briefing of their respective positions according

to a schedule to be established in a telephonic conference with chambers, and will resolve

their dispute, at which time it will terminate any continued jurisdiction over the matter. If not,

the court will terminate its previous retention of jurisdiction over implementation of the terms

of the Settlement Agreement in consideration of the narrow and precise scope of the

agreement terms that ought long ago to have been resolved.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 4, 2008

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:00-cv-01216-LAB Document 30 Filed 03/05/08 Page 2 of 2