Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Luis Valenzuela Rodriguez v. Arnold Schwarzenegger

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 20, 2011

LUIS VALENZUELA RODRIGUEZ,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, ET AL.
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Alfred T. Goodwin United States Circuit Judge

ORDER: DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION; DISMISSING DEFENDANTS CAGLE AND MACNEIL; SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE BEFORE THE HONORABLE JENNIFER L. THURSTON

In response to the court's November 9, 2011 order (the "November 9 Order"; Docket No. 79), Plaintiff filed a motion (the "Motion") for reconsideration and to vacate the November 9 Order (Docket No. 81). Reconsideration is appropriate where the moving party presents newly discovered evidence, makes a showing that the court committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or if there is an intervening change in controlling law. Nunes v. Ashcroft, 375 F.3d 805, 807 (9th Cir. 2004). Defendant cites nothing to support reconsideration of the November 9 Order. The court DENIES the Motion.

Despite the court's instruction in the November 9 Order, Plaintiff has provided no proof of service on defendants Cagle and MacNeil, nor has Plaintiff provided any additional evidence to locate defendants Cagle and MacNeil. Therefore, the court DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims against defendants Cagle and MacNeil without prejudice. See Nascimento v. Dummer, 508 F.3d 905, 910 (9th Cir. 2007) (failure to comply with a court order justifies dismissal).

This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on March 16, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. at Kern Valley State Prison, 3000 West Cecil Avenue, Delano, California 93216. Parties shall appear at the settlement conference with full authority to negotiate and settle the case on any terms. Each party shall provide a confidential settlement conference statement to Sujean Park, ADR Coordinator, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 95814, so they arrive no later than March 7, 2012 and file a Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement (See L.R. 270(d)); Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked "CONFIDENTIAL" with the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, typed or neatly printed, and include the following: a A brief statement of the facts of the case. b A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties likelihood of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in dispute. c A summary of the proceedings to date. d An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and trial. e The relief sought. f The party's position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands. g A brief statement of each party's expectations and goals for the settlement conference.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office at Kern Valley State Prison via facsimile at (661) 720-4949.

Alfred T. Goodwin

Sitting by designation

cc:

ADR Division, Attention: Sujean Park

US District Court 501 I Street, Suite 4-200 Sacramento, CA 95814 Fax: (916) 491-3912 email: spark@caed.uscourts.gov

20111220

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.