Perez et al v. Cox et al

Filing 169

ORDER Granting 168 Stipulation for Extension of Time (Second Request) re 153 Motion for Summary Judgment, 147 Motion for Summary Judgment, 146 Motion for Summary Judgment, 159 Motion for Summary Judgment. Responses due by 1/5/2022. Replies due by 2/4/2022. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 12/14/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - YAW)

Download PDF
Case 2:15-cv-01572-APG-DJA Document 169 Filed 12/14/21 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CLARK HILL PLLC PAOLA M. ARMENI Nevada Bar No. 8357 Email: parmeni@clarkhill.com 3800 Howard Hughes Pkwy., #500 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 Tel: (702) 862-8300 Fax: (702) 862-8400 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Perez Family UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA VICTOR PEREZ, as Special Administrator of CASE NO.: 2:15-cv-01572-APG-DJA the Estate of CARLOS PEREZ, deceased; VICTOR PEREZ, as the Guardia Ad Litem for S.E.P., a minor; VICTOR PEREZ, as the Guardia Ad Litem for A.I.P., a minor, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO Plaintiffs, EXTEND MOTION FOR vs. SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING DEADLINES STATE OF NEVADA, ex.rel. NEVADA (Second Request) DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; DIRECTOR GREG COX, individually; WARDEN DWIGHT NEVEN, individually; ASSISTANT WARDEN TIMOTHY FILSON, individually; COT. RAMOS, individually; LIEUTENANT OLIVER, individually; CORRECTIONS OFFICER CASTRO, individually; CORRECTIONS OFFICER SMITH, individually; and DOES I-X, inclusive; and ROES I-X, inclusive, Defendants. Victor Perez, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Carlos Perez, deceased, by and through his counsel, Paola M. Armeni, Esq., of the law firm of Clark Hill, Defendant Raynaldo Ramos, by and through his counsel, Robert W. Freeman, Jr. Esq., of the law firm of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP, Defendants, State of Nevada ex rel Nevada Department of Corrections, James Greg Cox, Timothy Filson, Dwight W. Neven and Ronald Oliver, by and through their counsel, Akke Levin, Esq., of the Attorney General’s Office, Defendant Isaiah Smith, by and through his counsel of record Jeffrey F. Barr, Esq. of the law firm of Armstrong Teasdale, and Defendant Jeff Castro, by and through his counsel, James A. Beckstrom, Esq., of the law firm of Marquis Aurbach Coffing, hereby respectfully submit this Stipulation and Order Extending Time 1 of 3 CLARKHILL\J2020\392971\264869168.v1-12/10/21 Case 2:15-cv-01572-APG-DJA Document 169 Filed 12/14/21 Page 2 of 3 1 for: (1) Plaintiff to Respond to Defendant Corrections Officer Castro’s Motion for Summary 2 Judgment [Dkt 146], Defendant Raynaldo-John Ramos’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt 3 147], State of Nevada Ex Rel. Nevada Department of Corrections, James “Greg” Cox, Timothy 4 Filson, Dwight Neven and Ronald Oliver’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt 153], and 5 Defendant Isaiah Smith’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt 159] all filed on October 25, 2021, 6 which responses are currently due on December 22, 2021, to be extended up to and including 7 January 5, 2022; and (2) all Defendants to file their Replies, currently due on January 21, 2021, to 8 be extended to and including February 4, 2022. 9 The law firm of Plaintiff’s counsel has experienced some unexpected personnel changes. 10 Those personnel changes directly affect the work being done on the Plaintiff’s case. As such, 11 Plaintiff’s counsel requested a two week extension to file the four Responses to the Defendants’ 12 Motions for Summary Judgment. Counsel for the Defendants have no objection to extending the 13 deadline for Responses and the parties further stipulate to extend the date to reply to Plaintiffs’ 14 Responses. This request for extension is made in good faith and not for the purposes of delay. 15 WHEREFORE, the parties stipulate that the time for Plaintiffs to file their Response(s) to 16 Defendant Corrections Officer Castro’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt 146], Defendant 17 Raynaldo-John Ramos’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt 147], State of Nevada Ex Rel. 18 Nevada Department of Corrections, James “Greg” Cox, Timothy Filson, Dwight Neven and 19 Ronald Oliver’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt 153], and Defendant Isaiah Smith’s Motion 20 for Summary Judgment [Dkt 159], be extended for two weeks up to and including January 5, 21 2022 and the time for Defendants to file their Replies be extended to and including February 4. 22 2022. Respectfully submitted this 13th day of December 2021. 23 CLARK HILL, PLLC MARQUIS AURBACH COFFING 24 /s/ Paola M. Armeni, Esq. ____________________________ PAOLA M. ARMENI Nevada Bar No. 8357 3800 Howard Hughes Pkwy., #500 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Perez Family /s/ James A. Beckstrom, Esq. _______________________________ James A. Beckstrom, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 14032 10001 Park Run Drive Las Vegas, NV 89145 Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Castro 25 26 27 28 2 of 3 CLARKHILL\J2020\392971\264869168.v1-12/10/21 Case 2:15-cv-01572-APG-DJA Document 169 Filed 12/14/21 Page 3 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ARMSTRONG TEASDALE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL /s/ Jeffrey F. Barr, Esq. ____________________________ Jeffrey F. Barr, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 007269 3770 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Attorneys for Defendant Isaiah Smith /s/ Akke Levin, Esq. ____________________________ Steven Shevorski, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 008256 Akke Levin, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 009102 100 N Carson St Carson City, NV 89701 Attorneys for Defendants, State of Nevada, Dwight W. Neven, James Greg Cox Ronald Oliver, Timothy Filson LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP /s/ Robert W. Freeman, Jr., Esq. __________________________________ Robert W Freeman, Jr., Esq. Nevada Bar No. 003062 6385 S. Rainbow Blvd., Ste. 600 Las Vegas, NV 89118 Attorneys for Defendant Raynaldo Ramos 13 ORDER 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED: December 14, 2021 DATED:______________________ 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE CASE NO.: 2:15-cv-01572-APG-DJA 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 of 3 CLARKHILL\J2020\392971\264869168.v1-12/10/21

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?