Filed: Jan. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2018
Summary: ORDER (Jt. Mot Vacate SC — ECF No. 58) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is the parties' Joint Motion to Vacate Order Setting Settlement Conference (ECF No. 58). The motion requests to vacate the settlement conference as the parties attended an earlier unsuccessful completed a settlement conference with the undersigned. At a hearing on May 16, 2017, the parties requested a settlement conference before the undersigned before the standard referral from the district judge a
Summary: ORDER (Jt. Mot Vacate SC — ECF No. 58) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is the parties' Joint Motion to Vacate Order Setting Settlement Conference (ECF No. 58). The motion requests to vacate the settlement conference as the parties attended an earlier unsuccessful completed a settlement conference with the undersigned. At a hearing on May 16, 2017, the parties requested a settlement conference before the undersigned before the standard referral from the district judge af..
More
ORDER
(Jt. Mot Vacate SC — ECF No. 58)
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
Before the court is the parties' Joint Motion to Vacate Order Setting Settlement Conference (ECF No. 58). The motion requests to vacate the settlement conference as the parties attended an earlier unsuccessful completed a settlement conference with the undersigned.
At a hearing on May 16, 2017, the parties requested a settlement conference before the undersigned before the standard referral from the district judge after the joint pretrial order is filed. The request was granted a settlement conference was conducted on August 11, 2017. The court gave the parties 30 days after the settlement conference to file their joint pretrial order.
At the settlement conference, offers and counteroffers were exchanged and plaintiff was given until August 18, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. to accept or reject the offer. The offer was ultimately rejected.
The parties filed their proposed joint pretrial order on November 30, 2017 which the district judge entered as an Order (ECF No. 55). and automatically referred it to the undersigned for a settlement conference.
The earlier settlement conference was held at the request of the parties after the close of discovery and after dispositive motion had been decided by the district judge to avoid the additional expense of filing the joint pretrial order. The district judge automatically referred the case for a mandatory settlement conference after the joint trial order was filed pursuant to his practice, and may not have been aware that a settlement conference had already been conducted. In the current motion, the parties jointly agree that plaintiff's position has not changed since the settlement conference and that another settlement conference would not be productive. As such, they request that the settlement conference set for January 19, 2018, be vacated.
For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the parties' Joint Motion for Relief from the Settlement Conference (ECF No. 58) is GRANTED and the settlement conference set for January 19, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. is VACATED.
