Wear et al v. Sprint Communications Company L.P. et al

Filing 22

ORDER Granting 21 Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to the Complaint. Level 3 Communications, LLC, Qwest Communications Corporation, Sprint Communications Company L.P., and Wiltel Communications, LLC answer due 8/2/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 5/2/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

d11

2:

O~

11

C/)ii:

.-12l

12

§~
z

• c5

O~

13

7~

~~~
U
~

a
0
u

~

14

Christopher J. Koenigs, Esq.
Michael B. Carroll, Esq.
SHERMAN & HOWARD L.L.C.
633 Seventeenth Street, Suite 3000
Denver, Colorado 80202
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
Qwest Communication Company, LLC
(Lead Counsel)

Joseph E. Jones, Esq.
FRASER STRYKER PC LLO
409 South 1ih Street
500 Energy Plaza
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
Level 3 Communications, LLC and
WitTel Communications, LLC
(Lead Counsel)

Matthew C. Addison, Esq., NSBN 4201
MCDONALD CARANO WILSON LLP
100 W. Liberty Street, Tenth Floor
Reno, NV 89501
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
Qwest Communications Company, LLC,
Level 3 Communications, LLC,
Sprint Communications Company, L.P.
and WitTel Communications, LLC
(Local Counsel)

J. Emmett Logan, Esq.
STINSON MORRISON HECKER
LLP
1201 Walnut, Suite 2900
Kansas City, MO 64106
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
Sprint Communications Company
L.P.

15
:..:J

z

so

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

17
18
19

ELIZABETH WEAR and JOHN
BUTCHER, and CARMEN WORSTELL,
on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,

20

Case No: 2:11-cv-00809-KJD-GWF

Plaintiffs,

21

vs.

22

SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS
COMPANY, L.P., QWEST
COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, LLC;
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC; and
WILTEL COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,

23
24
25

Defendants.

26
27
28

DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO
RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(A), defendants Sprint

2

Communications Company L.P., Qwest Communications Company, L.L.C., Level 3

3 Communications, L.L.C., and WilTel Communications, L.L.C. (collectively "Defendants")
4

hereby move the Court for an extension of time to respond to plaintiffs' Amended Class

5

Action Complaint (the "Complaint") to and including August 2, 2012. In support of this

6

motion, Defendants state:

7

1.

Plaintiffs consent to the extension of time requested in this motion.

8

2.

A number of class action lawsuits involving subject matter similar to this

9

lawsuit (together with this action, the "Related Class Actions") are pending in courts

10

around the country.

The Related Class Actions concern the installation of fiber-optic

11

cable and related telecommunications equipment within railroad rights of way across the

12

country.

13

3.

With the assistance of the mediator Professor Eric D. Green, counsel for

14

the various parties in the Related Class Actions (the "Parties") have reached agreement

15

on the substantive terms of a settlement of the claims in the Related Class Actions,

16

subject to: (a) finalizing settlement documentation, (b) obtaining final corporate

17

approvals, and (c) implementing the procedural steps necessary to present proposed

18

class action settlements to the multiple courts involved.

19

4.

The Parties have made significant progress in finalizing and implementing

20

class action settlement agreements in a number of the Related Class Actions pending

21

around the country.

22

following progress:

23
24
25

For example, among other things, the Parties have made the

a. The Parties have obtained final court approval of class action settlements
in five states: Alabama, Idaho, Illinois, Montana, and North Dakota.
b. The Parties have obtained preliminary approval of class action settlements

26

in eight states: Arkansas,

27

Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

28

Colorado,

Kansas,

Michigan,

Nebraska,

c. The Parties have submitted proposed class action settlements and are

2

1

awaiting preliminary approval in thirteen other states, in addition to the

2

states mentioned above:

3

Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,

4

Utah, and Virginia.

Delaware,

Florida,

Georgia,

Iowa,

Maine,

5

5.

Defendants' responses to the Complaint are currently due on or about May

6

4, 2012.

The Parties continue to work on settlement issues, but require more time

7

before they would be ready to submit a proposed Nevada settlement for this Court's

8

consideration.

9

6.

10

Defendants request a 90 day extension of time within which to respond to

the Complaint, i.e., an extension to and including August 2,2012.
7.

11

No previous extensions of this deadline have been granted. No scheduling

12

order has been entered in this action. The requested extension will not affect any other

13

deadlines applicable in this case.

14

/II

15

/II

16

/II

17

/II

18

/II

19

1/1

20

1/1

21

1/1

22

/II

23

/II

24

/II

25

1/1

26

/II

27

/II

28

1/1

3

1
2

Wherefore,

Defendants respectfully request entry of an order extending

Defendants' deadline to respond to the Complaint by 90 days, i.e., to and including

3 August 2, 2012.
4
5

Dated this ~ day of May, 2012.
MCDONALD CARANO WILSON LLP

6
7
8
9
10

d 1"1

Z

O~

C/)~

,-u~

§~~
,-..-1:\

o
'7
•

.

11
12

'-'0

jj~
'v oc
:-~
w-

13

~ ~~~
g~

14

y~~
0"''''

15

~~~

Z~~

16

o

By: /s/ Matthew C. Addison
Matthew C. Addison, NV Bar No. 4201
100 West Liberty Street, 10th Floor
Reno, NV 89501
Telephone: [phone]
[phone]
Facsimile:
E-mail: [e-mail]
(Local Counsel)
Attorneys for Defendants
Qwest Communications Company, LLC,
Level 3 Communications, LLC,
Sprint Communications Company, L.P.
And Wiltel Communications, LLC

17

~~

t;:-

O~
U'?
~

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________________
UNITED STATES JR.
GEORGE FOLEY,DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE
United States Magistrate Judge JUDGE
May 2, 2012
DATED: ________________________

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4

1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

2

I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that I am an employee of McDonald
and that pursuant to LR 5-3 I caused to be electronically filed on this

3

Carano Wilson

4

date a true and correct copy of the DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR

5

ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT with the Clerk of the

6

Court using the CM/ECF system, which will automatically e-serve the same on the

7

attorney of record set forth below.

8

Steven E. Guinn
Sara K. Almo
LAXALT & NOMURA, LTD
9600 Gateway Drive
Reno, NV 89521-8953

Mario P. Lovato
LOVATO LAW FIRM, P.C.
8670 W. Cheyenne Ave., Ste. 120
Las Vegas, NV 89129

Dan Millea
ZELLE, HOFFMAN, VOELBEL,
& MASON, LLP
500 Washington Ave. South, Ste. 4000
Minneapolis, MN 66415

William T. Gotfryd
Arthur T. Susman
SUSMAN HEFFNER & HURST LLP
Two First National Plaza
Chicago,IL 60603

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

LLP

Charles R. Watkins
John R. Wylie
DONALDSON & GUINN
300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 1700
Chicago, Illinois 60606

17
DATED this 1st day of May, 2012.

18
19

\s\ Nancy A. Hoy
Nancy A. Hoy

20
21

335832.1

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5