Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Williams v. Pfieffer, 1:17-cv-00549-AWI-EPG (PC). (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20181010a40 Visitors: 10
Filed: Oct. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 09, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FILED UNDER SEAL (ECF No. 46) ORDER RESETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE BARBARA A. McAULIFFE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Donald Lee Williams ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding with counsel in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This case was referred to the undersigned for a settlement conference on October 30, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., at the United States District Courthouse in Fresno, California. (ECF No.
More

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FILED UNDER SEAL (ECF No. 46) ORDER RESETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Donald Lee Williams ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding with counsel in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case was referred to the undersigned for a settlement conference on October 30, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., at the United States District Courthouse in Fresno, California. (ECF No. 40.)

On September 28, 2018, Plaintiff filed a request, under seal, for housing limitations to be included in the Court's transport order, or for alternative relief. (ECF Nos. 43, 46.) Defendants filed a response on October 4, 2018. (ECF No. 48.)

For the reasons stated in Defendants' response, the Court agrees that Plaintiff has not provided sufficient legal or factual support for the requested relief. In addition, with respect to the alternative relief requested, the Court has found that due to the unreliability of the available technology, such relief is not practicable for the purposes of conducting a settlement conference. Absent exigent circumstances, which have not been presented here, the Court generally will not grant such a request in the context of a settlement conference.

The Court notes that a settlement conference before the undersigned is voluntary in this instance. If, in light of this order, Plaintiff chooses not to appear at the settlement conference, the parties' counsel may continue to conduct settlement discussions without the involvement of the Court.

Finally, to permit Plaintiff an opportunity to respond to the Court's order, the settlement conference is reset for December 6, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. before the undersigned. As noted, if the parties or counsel are unable or unwilling to appear on this date, counsel are free to engage in settlement discussions at any time.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request filed under seal, (ECF No. 46), is DENIED; 2. This matter is set for a settlement conference on December 6, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. before the undersigned; 3. Plaintiff shall file a response within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this order indicating whether the new settlement conference date should be vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer