IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 12, 2010
JAMES T. FREELAND, PLAINTIFF,
SACRAMENTO CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff, a former county jail inmate proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 20, 2010, the court set a mandatory settlement conference in this case. The court also directed the parties, pursuant to Local Rule 270(b), to inform the court in writing as to whether they wished to proceed with that mandatory settlement conference before the undersigned magistrate judge or if they wished to proceed before a randomly-assigned magistrate judge.
As of the date of this order, the parties have consented to the undersigned conducting all further proceedings in this case. However, the parties must still inform the court whether they wish to proceed with the settlement conference before the undersigned magistrate judge, and waive any future disqualification of the undersigned from presiding over future proceedings in the case as a result, or would request a randomly-assigned settlement judge.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Within twenty-one days of the date of this order, each party shall inform the court in writing as to whether they wish to proceed with the settlement conference before the undersigned magistrate judge or if they wish to proceed before a randomly-assigned settlement judge. If the parties wish to proceed before the undersigned magistrate judge, each party shall return to the court the waiver of disqualification provided with this order. If any party does not wish the undersigned magistrate judge to preside at the settlement conference, they shall file a declaration stating that they have elected to proceed before a randomly-assigned settlement judge; and
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send each party the waiver of disqualification form with respect to settlement conferences.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.