Roberts v. Clark County School District

Filing 133

ORDER Granting 132 Stipulation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 6/8/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

Case 2:15-cv-00388-JAD-PAL Document 132 Filed 06/03/16 Page 1 of 4

KATHLEEN J. ENGLAND
Nevada Bar No. 206
2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9

ENGLAND LAW OFFICE

630 South Third Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone:
702.529-3211
E-mail:
[e-mail]
JASON R. MAIER
Nevada Bar No. 8557
DANIELLE J. BARRAZA
Nevada Bar No. 13822
MAIER GUTIERREZ A YON
400 South Seventh Street, Suite 400
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.629.7925
E-mail:
[e-mail]

10
11

MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE
Nevada Bar No, 10931
MCLETCHIE SHELL, LLC

12

14

70 I East Bridger Ave., Suite 520
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.4 71.6540
E-mail:
[e-mail]

15

Attorneys for Plaintiff Bradley Roberts

13

16
17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
18

DISTRICT OF NEVADA
19
20

BRADLEY ROBERTS, individually,

21

Plaintiff,

22

vs.

23

Case No.: 2:15-CV-00388-JAD-PAL

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR A
LIMITED EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY
TO ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO CONDUCT
REMAINING DEPOSITIONS

CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRJCT;
DOES I-X; and ROE CORPORATIONS I-X,
inclusive,
Defendants.

24
25
26

Plaintiff Bradley Roberts and Defendant Clark County School District, by and through their

27

undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and request that this Court amend the current scheduling order

28

and discovery plan by granting a limited extension of the current discovery cut-off date of June 6,

Case 2:15-cv-00388-JAD-PAL Document 132 Filed 06/03/16 Page 2 of 4

2016 only to allow for specific depositions to be taken by Plaintiff after the current discovery cutoff
2

of June 6, 2016. These depositions could not be accomplished in these final days of discovery due to

3

witness and counsel unavailability, and the importance of allowing CCSD's deposition ofthe Plaintiff,

4

as noticed for June 2, 2016, to go forward undisturbed.

5

DISCOVERY TO BE COMPLETED

6

AND REASONS FOR THIS LIMITED EXTENSION REQUEST TO COMPLETE

7

DEPOSITIONS

8

Plaintiffhas repeatedly expressed his intention and had already (on previous occasions) issued

9

notice for specific 30(b)(6) subjects for CCSD designees. Plaintiffhas always indicated his intention

10

to depose four fact witnesses in his chain of command or who attended and spoke at one or more of

II

the critical meeting with him on these matters 1: CCSD attorney Jon Okazaki, and then CCSD Police

12

Department officials Lt. Kenneth Young, Cpt. Anthony York, and Sgt. Anthony Jones. Plaintiff did

I3

not want to waste resources nor incur the expense of taking these additional depositions until

14

absolutely necessary, including his review of the documents that CCSD was recently ordered to

I5

produce regarding its decision-making process about the two CCSD policies which form the basis of

I6

this discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. [ECF No. 128].

17

Defendant CCSD produced those previously-withheld documents on May 17, 2016. Plaintiff

18

then narrowed, combined and focused the 30(b )(6) deposition subjects and percipient witness

19

depositions he wanted to take and reached out to CCSD to schedule those depositions. However, the

20

parties were unable to come to mutually available dates and times for those remaining depositions

21

within the current discovery deadline, thus prompting the instant request.

22

The parties have diligently worked together to come up with a schedule for these remaining

23

depositions. CCSD has informed Plaintiff that percipient witness Jon Okazaki will also be CCSD's

24

designee for the three 30(b )(6) deposition subjects (Subjects Nos. 4, 5, and 6) and he was not available

25

on the days and at the times (within discovery period) first noticed. Accordingly, Plaintiff and

26
27
1

28

Pared down from the I8+ witnesses listed by CCSD in their disclosures, and after CCSD
supplemented those disclosures to provide more information about the scope of their knowledge.

2

Case 2:15-cv-00388-JAD-PAL Document 132 Filed 06/03/16 Page 3 of 4

Defendant CCSD have agreed that these three 30(b)(6) designee depositions of CCSD, with Mr.
2

Okazaki as CCSD's designee will take place seriatim (beginning at 9:30 am) and be completed on

3

June 9, 2016. Mr. Okazaki's percipient witness deposition will be scheduled for the morning of June

4

10, 2016, with the understanding that it will be no longer than half the day. The parties have also

5

conferred and can agree to have the three depositions, Lt. Kenneth Young, Captain Anthony York,

6

and Sgt. Anthony Jones, take place beginning and finishing on one day, June 14, 2016, with Sgt.

7

Jones' deposition occurring first to accommodate his unavailability that afternoon.

8
9
u

...J
...J

The parties have been working diligently to accomplish these matters in light of this
background. On May 4, 2016, the parties submitted a proposed stipulation and request for stay of

10

remaining discovery due to the pendency of the cross motions for summary judgment, although the

11

parties had agreed that CCSD would depose Plaintiff prior to June 6, 2016 and had been working on

12

finding a mutually acceptable date. [ECF No. 127].

::..

z
~

~
N

UJ

13

On May 16, 2016, Plaintiff filed a request to submit supplemental briefing on the pending

-z

UJ::

14

cross-motions for partial summary judgment [ECF No. 129]. On May 17, 2016, the Court granted

::Ji~

15

Plaintiff's motion, allowing both sides to submit limited supplemental briefing by June 30, 2016.

wl
_,

16

However, that ORDER denied the parties' request for a discovery stay. [ECF No. 131].

-c:t:::
~~

17

The parties hastened to complete all remaining discovery in the last two and half weeks of the

18

existing discovery period. As noted above, Defendant CCSD produced the documents a day earlier

19

(on May 17, 2016) than required by this Court's ORDER [ECF No. 128] and took the ail-day

20

deposition ofPlaintiffRoberts on June 2, 2016. Due to CCSD's schedule (school ending on June 1,

21

20 16) and the existing schedules of the witnesses (Mr. Okazaki for all subjects and in his own right),

22

and their counsel, the parties were unable to schedule these specific depositions by June 6, 2016. The

23

parties and their counsel have been working together to arrive at this proposed deposition schedule

24

and are making this joint request for a limited extension of the current discovery cut-off date to allow

25

the remaining depositions to occur on the above-referenced dates.

c.t:::
c.t::::::n
r-~~

ol:;:
c.t::::

II

26

This request, and the taking of these depositions, will not impair the ability of the parties to

27

fully comply with this Court's Order [ECF. No. 131] with its supplemental briefing deadline of June

28

30, 2016 on the cross-motions for summary judgment.

3

Case 2:15-cv-00388-JAD-PAL Document 132 Filed 06/03/16 Page 4 of 4

This limited extension request, solely for the taking of the enumerated depositions on the dates
2

listed above, is sought in good faith and not for the purpose of any improper delay.

3
4

DATED June 3, 2016

5

MAIER GUTIERREZ AYON

6
7
8
9
::l
...J

10

Is/ Danielle J Barraza
JASON R. MAIER
Nevada Bar No. 8557
DANIELLE J. BARRAZA
Nevada Bar No. 13822
MAIER GUTIERREZ AYON
400 South Seventh Street, Suite 400
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

c...

z
~

11

«:.:

12

u:.JI-

13

KATHLEEN J. ENGLAND
Nevada Bar No. 206
ENGLAND LAW OFFICE

N""i

0::::<
O:::z
wi:
- z
f--oe::

:J~

CJ!;;:
ci

14

MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE
McLETCHIE SHELL LLC.
Attornevs for Plaintiff Bradlev Roberts
ORDER

15

u:.J

<

~

17

II

18

8th
June
IT IS SO ORDERED this __ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , 2016.

16

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4