Johnson v. Guerrero et al, No. 2:2016cv00445 - Document 26 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 9/16/18, adopting in full 25 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Plaintiff's 12 motion for default judgment is DENIED. Defendants' motions for relief from default (ECF No. 17 , 18 , 19 ) are GRANTED. This action is STAYED pending further order from the Court. The parties are directed to promptly meet and confer to discuss settlement of this action. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
Johnson v. Guerrero et al Doc. 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SCOTT JOHNSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-0445-MCE-AC v. ORDER PATRICIA GUERRERO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States 17 18 Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302. On January 16, 2018, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 19 20 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. 22 ECF No. 25. Neither party filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The Court has conducted a de novo review of this case, and finds the findings 23 24 and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, 25 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 16, 2018, are ADOPTED in 26 27 28 full; 2. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgement (ECF No. 12) is DENIED; 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3. Defendants’ motions for relief from default (ECF No. 17, 18, 19) are GRANTED; 3 4. This action is STAYED pending further order from the Court; 4 5. The parties are directed to promptly meet and confer to discuss settlement of 5 this action. Settlement discussions require focus and preparations and should involve 6 the attorneys who will try the case on any terms. Plaintiff should initiate settlement 7 discussions by providing a written itemization of damages and a meaningful settlement 8 demand that includes an explanation of why the demand is appropriate. Defendant 9 should respond with an acceptance of the offer, or with a meaningful counteroffer that 10 includes an explanation of why the counteroffer is reasonable. The parties should 11 continue in this way until they reach settlement or have exhausted informal settlement 12 efforts. 13 6. If the parties have not reached a settlement within 45 days of the date of this 14 order, the parties shall initiate participation in the Court’s Voluntary Dispute Resolution 15 Program (“VDRP”) by Court’s VDRP administrator, Sujean Park, at (916) 930-4278 or 16 Spark@caed.uscourts.gov. 17 18 19 20 7. The parties shall carefully review and comply with Local Rule 271, which outlines the specifications and requirements of VDRP. 8. No later than fourteen (14) days after completion of the VDRP session, the parties shall jointly file their VDRP Completion Report, consistent with Local Rule 271(o). 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: September 16, 2018 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.