Konecne et al v. Allied Van Lines, Inc. et al

Filing 82

ORDER Granting 80 Stipulation to Extend Time Re: 71 Motion for Relief. Responses due by 1/9/2018. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 1/2/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Case 2:16-cv-01655-APG-GWF Document 80 Filed 12/28/17 Page 1 of 2

1 CHERYL A. GRAMES, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 12752
2 Email: [e-mail]
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
3
6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600
4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118
Telephone [phone]
5 Fax [phone]
Attorney for Allied Van Lines, Inc. and
6 Berger Transfer and Storage, Inc.
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9
10

MEGHAN KONECNE and HOWARD
11 MISLE, individually and as husband and wife,

Case No. 2:16-CV-01655-APG-GFW

12

REQUEST TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR
DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RELIEF
UNDER RULE 60(b) (ECF NO. 71)

13

Plaintiffs,
vs.

14 ALLIED VAN LINES, INC., a foreign
corporation; BERGER TRANSFER &
15 STORAGE, INC., a foreign corporation; and
DOES I-V, ROES VI-X,
16
Defendants.
17

(FIRST REQUEST)

18
19

The above-referenced parties, by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby

20 agree and stipulate, subject to the Court’s approval, to extend the deadline for Defendant Allied
21 Van Lines, Inc. (“Defendant”) to respond to Plaintiffs Megan Konecne’s and Howard Misle’s
22 (“Plaintiffs”) Motion for Relief under FRCP 60(b) (ECF No. 71, filed on December 6, 2017). The
23 deadline for responding was December 20, 2017, but the parties have continued to focus on
24 finalizing their tentative settlement agreement, and inadvertently neglected to file a stipulation to
25 extend this particular response deadline. As the parties have set forth in their other stipulations
26 (all approved by the Court), the parties still require additional time to finalize the settlement
27 documents due to the impact of the end-of-the-year holidays on the parties’ schedules. As such,

LEWIS

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

28 extending the due date for Defendant’s response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Rule 60(b) Relief (ECF
4839-4343-8425.1

2:16-CV-01655-APG-GFW
Request to Extend Deadline to Respond to ECF No. 71
(First Request)

Case 2:16-cv-01655-APG-GWF Document 80 Filed 12/28/17 Page 2 of 2

1 No. 71) to January 9, 2018 should afford the parties sufficient time to finalize the agreement,
2 thereby bringing this matter to a resolution and thus obviating the need for filing any responses.
3

This is the parties’ first request to extend the deadline by which Defendant may file a

4 Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief under Rule 60(b) (ECF No. 71).
5

The proposed extension is requested in good faith and will not prejudice any party.

6

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

7

DATED this 28th day of December 2017.

DATED this 28th day of December 2017.

8

FENNEMORE CRAIG, PC

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

/s/ Brenoch R. Wirthlin
BRENOCH R. WIRTHLIN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10282
300 S. Fourth Street, Suite 1400
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

/s/ Cheryl A. Grames
CHERYL A. GRAMES, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 12752
6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600
Las Vegas, Nevada 89118
Attorneys for Defendants

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January day of _______________, 2017.
Dated this ____ 2, 2018.

17
18
19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

LEWIS

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

28
4839-4343-8425.1

2
Request to Extend Deadline to Respond to ECF No. 71
(First Request)

2:16-CV-01655-APG-GFW