National Public Radio, Inc. v. U.S. Central Command

District Court, S.D. California·Decided November 12, 2021·No. 3:21-cv-01079·Unknown

Opinion

NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO, INC. and Case No.: 3:21-cv-01079-MMA-AHG GRAHAM SMITH, ORDER: Plaintiffs, v. 1) VACATING MOTION HEARING SET FOR NOVEMBER 16, 2021 U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND and [ECF No. 11], U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Defendants. 2) GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION CONFERENCE [ECF No. 10], and 3) SETTING EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION CONFERENCE AND CONFERENCE VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Pre-Answer Early Neutral Evaluation Conference. ECF No. 10. On June 9, 2021, Plaintiffs filed suit in this district, alleging violations of the Freedom of Information Act, and seeking records from Defendants relating to a “a suspected friendly fire incident that took place in Fallujah, Iraq on 12 April, 2004.” ECF No. 1. On August 2, 2021, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint. ECF No. 6. As such, no Defendant answered Plaintiffs’ complaint. On November 4, 2021, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion, requesting that an Early Neutral Evaluation Conference (“ENE”) be scheduled before any answer had been filed. ECF No. 10; see CivLR 16.1(c)(1). On November 10, 2021, the Court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and ordered Defendants “to file a response within the time specified by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4)(A).” ECF No. 12 at 9. On November 12, 2021, Defendants filed a Notice of Non-Opposition to the instant motion, stating that “they do not oppose Plaintiffs’ request that the Court schedule an Early Neutral Evaluation.” ECF No. 13. The Court finds that this motion is suitable for determination on the papers and without oral argument in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). As such, the motion hearing scheduled for November 16, 2021 is VACATED. In this district, the Court generally conducts ENEs within forty-five days of the filing of an answer. See CivLR 16.1(c)(1) (“Within forty-five (45) days of the filing of an answer, counsel and the parties must appear before the assigned judicial officer supervising discovery for an early neutral evaluation conference”); Seoane v. Lexisnexis Risk Data Mgmt., No. 11cv0908 L-WMc, 2011 WL 2132844, at *1 (S.D. Cal. May 26, 2011); Yang v. DTS Financial Group, 570 F. Supp. 2d 1257, 1261 (S.D. Cal. 2008). However, “[a]t any time after the filing of a complaint and before an answer has been filed, counsel for any party may make a request in writing to the judicial officer assigned to supervise discovery in the case to hold an early neutral evaluation conference[.]” CivLR 16.1(c)(1). Upon such a request, the Court “will examine the circumstances of the case and the reasons asserted for the request[,]” and determine whether an expedited ENE would reduce the “expense and delay” of litigation. Id.; Seoane, 2011 WL 2132844, at *1. Upon due consideration of this case’s procedure history (see ECF Nos. 12, 13), and good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion. ECF No. 10. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: / / / / IT IS ORDERED that an Early Neutral Evaluation (“ENE”) of your case will be held on December 15, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. In accordance with the Local Rules, the Court requires personal attendance of all parties, party representatives, including claims adjusters for insured defendants, and the primary attorney(s) responsible for the litigation. CivLR 16.1(a). However, due to the current COVID-19 public emergency,1 and upon due consideration, the Court hereby MODIFIES the ENE to be via videoconference for all attendees. The Court issues the following Mandatory Procedures to be followed in preparation for the ENE: 1. Purpose of the Conference: The purpose of the ENE is to permit an informal discussion between the attorneys and the settlement judge of every aspect of the lawsuit in an effort to achieve an early resolution of the case. All conference discussions will be informal, off the record, and confidential. 2. Full Settlement Authority Required: A party or party representative with full and complete authority to enter into a binding settlement must be present via videoconference or immediately available to join. Full authority to settle means that a person must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989). The person needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l, Inc.,

1 On March 2, 2021, Chief Judge Dana M. Sabraw issued an Order in response to the COVID-19 public emergency (“CJO #62”) which, among other things, suspends the requirement under Civil Local Rule 16.1(a) that ENEs be conducted in person. See CJO #62 at 1. CJO #62 is available on the Court website at https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/_assets/pdf/rules/Chief%20Judge%20Order%2062%20- %20Civil%20Case%20Proceedings%20During%20the%20Covid- 19%20Public%20Emergency.pdf. The suspension of the requirement under Civil Local Rule 16.1(a) that ENEs be conducted in person is also reiterated by CJO #62-B, filed on June 11, 2021. CJO #62-B is available on the Court website at 216 F.R.D. 481, 485–86 (D. Ariz. 2003). Limited or sum certain authority is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595–97 (8th Cir. 2001). A person who needs to call another person who is not present on the videoconference before agreeing to any settlement does not have full authority. 3. Confidential ENE Statements Required: No later than December 8, 2021, the parties shall submit confidential statements of five (5) pages or less directly to the chambers of Magistrate Judge Goddard outlining the nature of the case, the claims, and the defenses. These statements shall not be filed or served on opposing counsel. They shall be lodged via email at efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov. The ENE statement is limited to five (5) pages or less, and up to five (5) pages of exhibits or declarations. Each party’s ENE statement must outline: A. the nature of the case and the claims, B. position on liability or defense, C. position regarding settlement of the case with a specific2 demand/offer for settlement,3 and D. any previous settlement negotiations or mediation efforts. 4. Case Management Conference: In the event the case does not settle at the ENE, the Court will immediately thereafter hold a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b). Appearance of the parties at the CMC is not required. The Court orders the following to occur before the CMC: A. The parties must meet and confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) no later than November 30, 2021. 2 A general statement, such as that a party “will negotiate in good faith,” is a not a specific demand or offer.

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

National Public Radio, Inc. v. U.S. Central Command, (S.D. Cal. 2021).

National Public Radio, Inc. v. U.S. Central Command (National Public Radio, Inc. v. U.S. Central Command) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related