1 JUAnSitOedN S Mtat.e Fs RAItEtoRrnSeOyN 2 District of Nevada Nevada Bar No. 7709 3 PATRICK A. ROSE 4 Assistant United States Attorney Nevada Bar No. 5109 5 501 Las Vegas Blvd. So., Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 6 (702) 388-6336 [email protected] 7 Attorneys for the United States 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 11 Nanda Sharif-Pour, Case No. 2:20-cv-01271-CDS-EJY 12 Plaintiff, Unopposed Motion for Exception from 13 v. Attendance Requirements for Settlement Conference 14 United States of America ex rel United States Postal Service, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 Federal Defendant, the United States, moves for an order excepting it from the 19 requirements, as applicable, that the settlement conference be attended by all Defendants 20 and by a representative of the insurance carrier with authority to settle the matter up to the 21 full amount of the claim. See Order at 2:2–6, ECF No. 22. The Order further provides that 22 any request to be excused from such requirements must be filed, after consultation with 23 opposing counsel, at least seven days before the settlement conference. Undersigned 24 defense counsel has consulted with Plaintiff’s counsel, who advises that he does not object 25 to the exception requested herein, namely, that the United States be permitted to 26 participate in the settlement conference via the personal attendance of undersigned defense 27 counsel (AUSA Patrick Rose) and telephonic participation by United States Postal Service 28 Attorney Stanford M. Bjurstrom, who is based in St. Louis, Missouri. 1 I. Introduction 2 This case arises out of a car accident on November 1, 2017 between Plaintiff Nanda 3 Sharif-Pour and Steven Miller, an employee of the United States Postal Service who was 4 operating a Postal Service vehicle in the course and scope of his federal employment. 5 After exhausting administrative remedies, Plaintiff commenced this lawsuit 6 pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act,

(b)(1), 1402(b), 2401(b), 2402, 7 2671-2680 (“FTCA”). Following discovery, this case has been set for an August 4, 2022, 8 settlement conference. 9 Plaintiff has not made a settlement demand during the litigation. She made pre- 10 litigation demand to the Postal Service. 11 II. Points and Authorities 12 The federal government is unlike other litigants in terms of geographic breath, 13 nature of issues, and number of cases. See United States v. Mendoza,

, 159 14 (1984). The authority to settle most civil cases against the government rests with varying 15 management personnel within the local United States Attorney’s Office or at Department 16 of Justice (“DOJ”) headquarters, depending on the dollar amount and the concurrence of 17 the client agency. See

(a); 28 C.F.R. Part 0, Subpart Y, Appendix. There 18 is not an insurance carrier for this matter. 19 As the advisory committee recognized, “[p]articularly in litigation in which 20 governmental agencies . . . are involved, there may be no one with on-the-spot settlement 21 authority, and the most that should be expected is access to a person who would have a 22 major role in submitting a recommendation to the body or board with ultimate decision- 23 making responsibility.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s note (1993 amendment, 24 subdivision (c)). Additionally, a district court can consider alternative methods of 25 participation, such as via telephone. See United States v. United States Dist. Court,

(9th Cir. 2012). 27 The United States Attorney’s Office understands the importance of ENEs, 1 cases. This office has participated in many of them, in good faith, and consistent with the 2 authority set forth in the applicable regulations. 3 The Postal Service has also participated in ENEs and settlement conferences in this 4 district including via telephonic participation. With the Postal Service’s financial losses of 5 billions of dollars during the last several years, the Postal Service has sought to lower its 6 costs in a number of ways including reductions in personnel, facilities, and authorized 7 travel for employees. The Postal Service’s tort litigation section has a relatively small 8 number of attorneys to address numerous claims and cases across the country. 9 Recommendations (through the respective DOJ and client agency chains of 10 command) regarding any particular settlement proposal in this case will originate with the 11 undersigned AUSA and assigned Postal Service attorney. 12 Based on the reasons and circumstances above, the United States respectfully 13 requests exception from the Order’s requirement of personal attendance by a representative 14 with binding settlement authority. In lieu of such requirement, the undersigned AUSA 15 would personally attend and participate, while Postal Service attorney Stanford Bjurstrom 16 would participate via telephone. 17 /// 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 1 IW. Conclusion 2 Based on the reasons and circumstances above, the United States respectfully 3 || requests that the Court grant this motion so as to allow AUSA Rose to personally attend 4 || and participate in the settlement conference, and Postal Service attorney Stanford 5 || Bjurstrom to participate via telephone, in lieu of the personal attendance requirements 6 || otherwise set forth in the Order, ECF No. 22. 7 Respectfully submitted this 15th day of July 2022. 8 9 JASON M. FRIERSON 10 United States Attorney /s/ Patrick A. Rose I PATRICK A. ROSE 10 Assistant United States Attorney 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED 15 16 pn □□□ 7 UNITED|\STAT GISTRATE JUDGE

18 DATED: _July 15.2022. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28