Mary Kloeffler v. ADP TotalSource, Inc., et al.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedApril 14, 2026
Docket3:26-cv-00406
StatusUnknown

This text of Mary Kloeffler v. ADP TotalSource, Inc., et al. (Mary Kloeffler v. ADP TotalSource, Inc., et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mary Kloeffler v. ADP TotalSource, Inc., et al., (S.D. Cal. 2026).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARY KLOEFFLER, Case No.: 26-cv-00406-AGS-GC

12 Plaintiff, ORDER RESETTING EARLY 13 v. NEUTRAL EVALUATION AND CASE MANAGEMENT 14 ADP TOTALSOURCE, INC., et al., CONFERENCE AND ISSUING 15 Defendants. UPDATED GUIDELINES 16

17 On April 3, 2026, this case was transferred to Magistrate Judge Guillermo Cabrera 18 for all further proceedings. (ECF No. 10.) Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the 19 Early Neutral Evaluation (“ENE”) of your case will be held by video conference1 on 20 May 12, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. before Judge Cabrera.2 If the case does not settle during the 21 ENE, a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 22 Procedure 16(b) will be held immediately after the ENE. This Order establishes mandatory 23 guidelines for the parties preparing for the ENE and CMC. Absent express permission 24 25 26 1 Mandatory directions for participating in the ENE by video conference are attached. 27 2 The parties may request that the ENE be converted to an in-person conference informally by placing a joint call to chambers or by lodging a joint email to 28 1 obtained from this Court, and notwithstanding the pendency of any motion, counsel and all 2 parties shall timely comply with the dates and deadlines in this Order. 3 1. Review of Chambers Rules: Counsel3 shall follow the Civil Local Rules for 4 the Southern District of California. Counsel must read Judge Cabrera’s Chambers Rules 5 and Rule 26(f) Conference Checklist. Counsel must also read the Chambers Rules or 6 Standing Order of the assigned District Judge. This information is accessible via the 7 Court’s website at www.casd.uscourts.gov. 8 2. Purpose of the ENE: The purpose of the ENE is to permit an informal 9 discussion between the parties, their counsel, and the Magistrate Judge of every aspect of 10 the lawsuit to achieve an early resolution of the case. Counsel and the parties shall come 11 prepared to engage in a detailed discussion of the merits of their respective cases and 12 engage in good faith settlement discussions. All discussions during the ENE are informal, 13 off the record, privileged and confidential. Counsel for any non-English speaking party is 14 responsible for arranging for the appearance of an interpreter at the conference. Counsel 15 should note with particularity the requirement that all parties attend the ENE with full 16 authority to settle the case. 17 3. Required attendance: Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.1(c), all parties 18 (including those indemnified by others), claims adjusters for insured defendants, the 19 principal attorney(s) responsible for the litigation, and non-lawyer representatives with full 20 and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding settlement must be present 21 and legally and factually prepared to discuss and resolve the case at the ENE. 22 a. “Full and unlimited authority” means that the individuals attending the 23 ENE must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any 24 settlement terms acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat 25 Corp., 871 F.2d 648 (7th Cir. 1989). The person needs to have “unfettered discretion and 26 27 28 1 authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l, Inc., 216 2 F.R.D. 481, 485–86 (D. Ariz. 2003). One of the purposes of requiring a person with 3 unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference is that the person’s view of the case 4 may be altered during a face-to-face conference. Id. at 486. A limited or sum certain 5 authority is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595–97 (8th Cir. 6 2001). 7 b. In the case of a legal entity (e.g., a corporation, LLC, partnership, or 8 trust), an authorized representative of the entity (who is not retained outside counsel) must 9 be present and must have discretionary authority to commit the company to pay an amount 10 up to the amount of the plaintiff’s prayer, excluding punitive damages. The purpose of this 11 requirement is to have representatives present who can settle the case during the conference 12 without consulting a superior. 13 c. A government entity is excused from this requirement so long as the 14 government attorney who attends the ENE conference or settlement conference has (1) 15 primary responsibility for handling the case, and (2) authority to negotiate and recommend 16 settlement offers to the government official(s) having ultimate settlement authority. 17 d. The Court will not grant requests to excuse a required party from 18 personally appearing absent exceptional circumstances. If counsel believes there are 19 exceptional circumstances to request that a required party be excused from personally 20 appearing, they must confer with opposing counsel prior to making the request. Such 21 requests may then be made by filing a Joint Motion or, where opposing counsel is 22 unavailable, an ex parte request outlining the exceptional circumstances for the request. 23 Any request to excuse a required party from personally appearing must be filed on the 24 docket as a Joint Motion or ex parte request at least ten (10) days before the scheduled 25 ENE. 26 e. If any of the required representatives for the parties fail to appear 27 at the ENE/CMC, the Court will issue an Order to Show Cause to determine whether 28 sanctions will be imposed. 1 4. Confidential ENE Statements Required: 2 a. No later than May 5, 2026, each party shall lodge a confidential ENE 3 statement by email to efile_cabrera@casd.uscourts.gov. The confidential ENE statements 4 shall be five pages or less. Exhibits to confidential ENE statements are not required or 5 recommended. If exhibits are included, confidential ENE statements including exhibits 6 shall be a maximum of twenty-five (25) pages. Failure to timely lodge the confidential 7 ENE statement may subject the parties to sanctions. 8 b. All confidential ENE statements must include: 9 i. A brief description of the case and the claims asserted; 10 ii. The party’s position on liability and damages with controlling 11 legal authority; 12 iii. A specific and current demand for settlement addressing all relief 13 or remedies sought, as well as the specific basis for each type of relief. A general statement 14 that a party will “negotiate in good faith,” “offer a nominal cash sum,” or “be prepared to 15 make an offer at the conference” is not a specific demand or offer;4 16 iv. A brief description of any previous settlement negotiations or 17 mediation efforts; 18 v. If any video or audio recording exists of the incident(s) on which 19 plaintiff’s claims are predicated, counsel must lodge the video as an exhibit to the ENE 20 statement. The video must be lodged by delivering a USB flash drive to the Court; 21 vi. In cases alleging violations of any or all of the Song-Beverly 22 Consumer Warranty Act, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, the Fair Debt Collection 23 Practices Act, the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Truth in Lending Act, 24 or the Fair Credit Reporting Act in which the plaintiff alleges a claim for statutory 25

26 27 4 If a specific demand for settlement cannot be made at the time the settlement statement is submitted, state the reasons why and explain when the party will be able to 28 1 attorneys’ fees, an itemized billing statement detailing all costs and fees sought by the 2 plaintiff as of the date of the ENE;5 and 3 vii.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mary Kloeffler v. ADP TotalSource, Inc., et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mary-kloeffler-v-adp-totalsource-inc-et-al-casd-2026.