(PC) Motley v. Covello

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 16, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00002
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 EDWARD EUGENE MOTLEY, No. 2:24-cv-00002-DJC-EFB (PC) 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 15 PATRICK COVELLO, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 19 U.S.C. §1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference. 20 Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan to conduct a settlement 21 conference at the California State Prison, Sacramento (SAC), 100 Prison Road, Represa, CA 22 95671 on July 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. The Court will issue any necessary transportation order in 23 due course. 24 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan 26 on July 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. at SAC. 27 2. Parties are instructed to have a principal with full settlement authority present at the 28 Settlement Conference or to be fully authorized to settle the matter on any terms. The 2 individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and 3 authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. The purpose 4 behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the 5 parties’ view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. An 6 authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to 7 comply with the requirement of full authority to settle1. 8 3. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than July 21, 9 2025 to SCRorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement 10 statement to U.S. District Court, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 11 95814 “Attn: Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan” so it arrives no later than July 21, 12 2025. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT 13 STATEMENT.” Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of 14 Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)). Parties are encouraged to share 15 their settlement conference statement with the opposing party, but are also invited to 16 submit a confidential statement to Judge Riordan. 17 18 Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on 19 any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with 20 the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. 21

22 1 While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has the authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement 23 conferences… .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2012)(“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in mandatory 24 settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any 25 settlement terms acceptable to the parties. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989), cited with approval in Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F.3d 1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993). 26 The individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 27 2003), amended on recon. in part, Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 2003 WL 23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the parties’ view of 28 the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Pitman, 216 F.R.D. at 486. An authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to comply with the requirement of full authority to settle. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596-97 (8th Cir. 2001). 1 2 3 The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, 4 typed or neatly printed, and include the following: 5 6 a. A brief statement of the facts, legal claims, relief sought, and defenses. 7 b. A summary of court proceedings to date and upcoming court proceedings, 8 including summary judgment deadlines and whether there is a scheduled trial date. 9 c. Discovery status. 10 d. An estimate of the cost and time needed to complete fact and expert discovery, 11 pretrial preparation, and trial. 12 e. Any settlement discussions (informal or formal) that have already occurred. 13 f. Any related cases or other cases involving the same or similar parties. 14 g. Any impediments to settlement. 15 h. Any other information the party thinks would help facilitate settlement. 16 17 Multi-page exhibits must be internally paginated, with the pagination for each exhibit 18 beginning at one (1) (for example, Exh. A-1, Exh. A-2, etc.). 19 20 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a courtesy copy of this order on the 21 Litigation Office at SAC via fax at (916) 294-3072 or via email. 22 A STS > 23 Date: July 16, 2025 Z Lor Lp dil ef, A □ Zé Lon □□ 24 EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28