(PC) Filer v. Guzman-Rodriguez et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BRYANT JOSEPH FILER,
Plaintiff,
v.
A. GUZMAN-RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant.
Case No.: 1:25-cv-01615-JLT-CDB (PC)
ORDER REFERRING CASE TO POST-
SCREENING ADR AND STAYING CASE
FOR 120 DAYS
45-DAY DEADLINE
Plaintiff Bryant Joseph Filer (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil
rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 	Following screening, this action proceeds on
Plaintiff’s complaint, filed on November 21, 2025 (Doc. 1) against Defendant A. Guzman-
Rodriguez, a correctional officer at California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility, for an Eighth
Amendment claim alleging excessive force. See (Doc. 16).
On October 9, 2026, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint. (Doc. 21).
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, therefore, STAYS this action for 120 days to allow the parties to investigate
Plaintiff’s claims, meet and confer, and participate in early settlement conference. 	The Court
Case 1:25-cv-01615-JLT-CDB Document 22 Filed 10/15/26 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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.
Conclusion and Order
For the foregoing reasons, the Court HEREBY ORDERS:
1. 	This action is STAYED for 120 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 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 60 days from the date of this order, the assigned Deputy Attorney General
Shall 	contact 	the 	undersigned’s 	Courtroom 	Deputy 	Clerk 	at
cboren@caed.uscourts.gov to schedule the settlement conference, assuming the parties
agree to participate in 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), the Court’s screening order (Doc. 11), the Court’s order finding at least one
cognizable claims (Doc. 16), and this order to Supervising Deputy Attorney Lawrence
Bragg, and a copy of this Order to ADR Coordinator Sujean Park.
Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Case 1:25-cv-01615-JLT-CDB Document 22 Filed 10/15/26 Page 2 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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.
Dated: 	October 15, 2026 	___________________ 	_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 1:25-cv-01615-JLT-CDB Document 22 Filed 10/15/26 Page 3 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BRYANT JOSEPH FILER,
Plaintiff,
v.
A. GUZMAN-RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant.
Case No. 1:25-cv-001615-JLT-CDB (PC)
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:
________________________________
Signature
Plaintiff or Counsel for Defendants
Case 1:25-cv-01615-JLT-CDB Document 22 Filed 10/15/26 Page 4 of 4