From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jace v. Lirones

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 24, 2023
1:22-cv-00419-ADA-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2023)

Opinion

1:22-cv-00419-ADA-CDB (PC)

07-24-2023

MICHAEL JACE, Plaintiff, v. MARGARET LIRONES, et al., Defendants.


ORDER REFERRING CASE TO POSTSCREENING ADR AND STAYING CASE FOR 90 DAYS

FORTY-FIVE (45) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Michael Jace is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendant A. Peterson for a violation of the First Amendment.

The Court refers all civil rights cases filed by pro se inmates to Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) to attempt to resolve such cases more expeditiously and less expensively. In appropriate cases, defense counsel from the California Attorney General's Office have agreed to participate in ADR. No claims, defenses, or objections are waived by the parties' participation.

The Court stays this action for ninety days to allow the parties to investigate Plaintiff's claims, meet and confer, and participate in an early settlement conference. The Court presumes that all post-screening civil rights cases assigned to the undersigned will proceed to a settlement conference. However, if, after investigating Plaintiff's claims and meeting and conferring, either party finds that a settlement conference would be a waste of resources, the party may opt out of the early settlement conference.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. This action is STAYED for ninety (90) days to allow the parties an opportunity to settle their dispute before the discovery process begins. No pleadings or motions may be filed in this case during the stay. The parties shall not engage in formal discovery, but they may engage in informal discovery to prepare for the settlement conference.

2. Within forty-five (45) days from the date of this order, the parties SHALL file the attached notice, indicating their agreement to proceed to an early settlement conference or their belief that settlement is not achievable at this time.

3. Within sixty (60) days from the date of this order, the assigned Deputy Attorney General SHALL contact the undersigned's Courtroom Deputy Clerk at shall@caed.uscourts.gov to schedule the settlement conference, assuming the parties agree to proceed to an early settlement conference.

4. If the parties reach a settlement during the stay of this action, they SHALL file a Notice of Settlement as required by Local Rule 160.

5. The Clerk of the Court SHALL serve via email copies of Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1, Ex. A), the Court's Findings and Recommendations issued March 16, 2023 following screening order (Doc. 20), and this Order to Supervising Deputy Attorney General Giam M. Nguyen, and a copy of this Order to ADR Coordinator Sujean Park.

6. The parties are obligated to keep the Court informed of their current addresses during the stay and the pendency of this action. Changes of address must be reported promptly in a Notice of Change of Address. See L.R. 182(f).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE REGARDING EARLY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

1. The party or counsel agrees that an early settlement conference would be productive and wishes to engage in an early settlement conference.

Yes __ No___

2. Plaintiff (check one):

___would like to participate in the settlement conference in person.

__would like to participate in the settlement conference by telephone or video conference.

Dated:

Plaintiff or Counsel for Defendant


Summaries of

Jace v. Lirones

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 24, 2023
1:22-cv-00419-ADA-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2023)
Case details for

Jace v. Lirones

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL JACE, Plaintiff, v. MARGARET LIRONES, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 24, 2023

Citations

1:22-cv-00419-ADA-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2023)