IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 7, 2011
ABEL CANO, PLAINTIFF,
B. NAKU, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Having reviewed the responses by both parties to the order, filed on December 23, 2010, the court is unable to determine whether plaintiff is willing to engage in further settlement negotiations, proposed as an alternative by the defendant to his request that the initial settlement be enforced.*fn1 In order for another settlement conference to be scheduled, plaintiff must be aware that should further negotiations result in an agreement to settle, the settlement will be binding as of the date when it is agreed to by both parties. Plaintiff will not be permitted to wait to see if terms are complied with to his satisfaction, and whether or not plaintiff signs any such agreement will not be dispositive. Rather, an oral agreement at the settlement conference to new terms and conditions will be sufficient. The parties may, of course, agree that this court will retain jurisdiction for a limited period to mediate any dispute as to the terms or conditions of any future settlement. If plaintiff does not agree to another settlement conference, this matter will be re-set for trial.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff is to inform the court within fourteen days whether or not he would be amenable to another settlement conference; and
2. Failure of plaintiff to agree to another settlement conference will result in this matter being re-set for trial.