W3B:In judicial settlement conferences (JSCs), judges try to settle cases, using various techniques while wearing their robes. Judges usually work with attorneys, although they may ask clients to stay nearby or be available by phone. Occasionally, clients might be asked to attend and participate. The judge's approach might be facilitative, while conveying hints at what the case is worth, or involve pressing parties to adopt particular settlement terms. If the judge also may be deciding the case, the judge's role risks restraining the advocacy of the attorneys, who may fear alienating the decision maker. JSCs are a common forum for settling disputes, at least in the United States and some other common law countries. In civil law countries, however, JSCs' usage may vary from routine to sporadic to not at all.

What, if any, specific benefits would the judges achieve by meeting separately with each attorney? What statements or questions presented in the caucuses would have been risky to present in a joint session?