HOUGHTON — A settlement conference has been ordered March 24 in the case of a former Michigan Technological University student suing the school over his expulsion for a post made on the social media site Yik Yak.

The hearing in the case of Matthew Schultz will be in U.S. District Court in Marquette. Both parties and their attorneys must attend the hearing, as well as a member of Tech’s board authorized to act on behalf of the university.

Schultz, of Norway, is suing the university, several officials and Ryan Grainger, whose Twitter account posted a doctored version of Schultz’s post.

Schultz made a post on Yik Yak saying, “I’m gonna shoot all black people …… a smile tomorrow,” followed by a smiley-face emoji. The first part of the sentence mimicked a threat made on Yik Yak at another university shortly before Schultz’s post.

The post from Grainger’s account, which was directed at university officials, included a screenshot of Schultz’s post, but with the post-ellipsis portion whited out.

Schultz is seeking damages of more than $75,000 and reinstatement to the university. He claims the university violated his First Amendment right to free speech, while the university’s disciplinary process violated due process. The university wants the case dismissed.

At a hearing before the settlement conference order, Michigan Tech representatives said the suit should be thrown out on several grounds, including that Schultz’s original post could be considered a “true threat,” stripping it of First Amendment protection, and that Tech employees named individually in the suit should receive qualified immunity for performing their jobs.

Grainger said he had received the altered screenshot from another operator of the @MTUYaks Twitter account but had not altered it himself.

Judges in settlement conferences act as mediators to help the sides resolve differences and reach a settlement but cannot resolve the case, according to a federal U.S. District Court site. If the parties cannot reach an agreement, the case proceeds to trial.

As in most cases, a different judge than the trial judge will preside over the hearing.