Gamble v. Huntington National Bank et al

Filing 30

ORDER Granting 26 Stipulation. IT IS ORDERED that Gamble shall have until 10/21/16 to respond to 9 the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint as well as 14 the Motion to Stay Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 10/13/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5

McCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP
Kristin A. Schuler-Hintz (NSB# 7171)
[e-mail]
Thomas N. Beckom, Esq. (NSB# 12554)
[e-mail]
9510 West Sahara Avenue, Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

12
13
14
15
16
17

Case No. 2:16-cv-01936-GMN-CWH

KEVIN M. GAMBLE,

11
9510 WEST SAHARA AVENUE, SUITE 200
LAS VEGAS, NV 89117
TELEPHONE [phone]/Facsimile [phone]

McCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP

10

Plaintiff,
v.
HUNTINGTON
NATIONAL
BANK;
HOMEWARD
RESIDENTIAL,
INC;
SYNCHRONY
BANK;
EQUIFAX
INFORMATION
SERVICES,
LLC;
EXPERIENCE INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC; TRANSUNION, LLC

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO RESPOND TO THE
COMPLAINT AS WELL AS
STIPULATION RESOLVING
OBJECTION [DOC 25] AND OTHER
RELATED MATTERS
(Third Request)

Defendants.

18
19
20

COMES HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL INC, (hereinafter “HOMEWARD”) on the one
hand by and through their counsel of record Thomas N. Beckom, Esq of the law firm of McCarthy

21
& Holthus LLP; and KEVIN GAMBLE (“GAMBLE”) by and through their counsel of record
22
23

Matthew I. Knepper, Esq of the Law Firm of Knepper & Clark, LLC and hereby file this

24

Stipulation for Extension of Time to Respond to the Motion to Dismiss as well as Stipulation

25

Resolving Objection and Other Related Matters pursuant to LR 6-1.

26
27
28

RECITALS
1. On August 15, 2016 Gamble filed a complaint alleging inter alia violations of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act. [Doc 1]

1
2

2. On or about September 7, 2016; Homeward filed a Motion to Dismiss [Doc 9] and
thereafter filed a Motion to Stay Discovery [Doc 14] in which the nexus of both motions

3

was that Mr. Gamble had not made a prima facie showing on an inaccuracy sufficient to

4

support a claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

5

Homeward’s assessment.

6

Mr. Gamble disagrees with

3. Additionally, Homeward contended in the Motion to Stay Discovery that discovery would

7
be essentially unduly burdensome and a carte blanc invasion into Homeward’s affairs
8
9

11

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

9510 WEST SAHARA AVENUE, SUITE 200
LAS VEGAS, NV 89117
TELEPHONE [phone]/Facsimile [phone]

McCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP

10

12
13
14

which was unnecessary in light of the credit report containing no inaccuracy. Mr. Gamble
disagrees with this assessment.
4. On October 6, 2016; Gamble filed a proposed discovery plan which had affixed
Homeward’s attorney’s e-signature to the plan. [Doc 24].
5. On October 6, 2016; Homeward objected and in said objection noted that there may have
been a miscommunication regarding ratification of the Discovery Plan as Homeward

15
continued to contend that in light of the lack of a prima facie inaccuracy in the credit
16
17

report that FRCP 26 disclosures as well as extensive discovery into the elements of an

18

FCRA claim were inappropriate. Gamble however disagrees and contends that discovery

19

is appropriate, however does agree that the e-signature issue was the result of an errant

20

miscommunication.

21
22

6. In the interim however, Gamble and Homeward have engaged in settlement discussion and
Gamble has issued a settlement proposal to Homeward. Homeward is evaluating this

23
24
25
26
27
28

settlement proposal at this time.
7. Due to the pending settlement discussion Gamble and Homeward hereby stipulate as
follows.
8. Gamble has previously asked for two extensions to respond to the Motion to Dismiss,
however the nexus of the matter has changed in that the parties may settle.

1

9. Homeward however reserves all rights and continues to contend that discovery is improper
unless it is satisfied that Gamble has made a prima facie showing of a violation under the

2

FCRA.

3
4
5

STIPULATION

6

It is hereby STIPULATED that Gamble shall have until October 21, 2016 to respond to

7
the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint as well as the Motion to Stay Discovery;
8
It is further STIPULATED that Homeward shall have until October 28, 2016 to produce

9

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

Fed. R. Civ. Pro 26 disclosures, however Homeward will not be compelled to produce its policies

11
9510 WEST SAHARA AVENUE, SUITE 200
LAS VEGAS, NV 89117
TELEPHONE [phone]/Facsimile [phone]

McCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP

10

and procedures for credit reporting until either (1) a discovery request is directed at Homeward

12

requesting this material (which would allow Homeward to object on an appropriate basis) or (2)

13

the Motion to Stay Discovery is resolved;

14

/…/…/

15
16
17

/…/…/

18
19

/…/…/

20
21

/…/…/

22
23
24

/…/…/

25
26

/…/…/

27
28

/…/…/

1
2

It is further STIPULATED that the Objection to the Proposed Discovery Plan [Doc 25] is

3

hereby deemed withdrawn however both parties note that Homeward continues to affirm its

4

original position regarding a discovery stay which will be resolved by the magistrate at a later

5

date as appropriate

6
7

DATED this 6th day of October, 2016

DATED this 6th day of October, 2016

KNEPPER AND CLARK LLC

McCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP

8
9

11

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

9510 WEST SAHARA AVENUE, SUITE 200
LAS VEGAS, NV 89117
TELEPHONE [phone]/Facsimile [phone]

McCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP

10

/s/ Matthew Knepper, Esq

12

Matt Knepper, Esq
Nevada Bar No. 12796
10040 W. Cheyenne Ave. Suite 170-109
Las Vegas, NV 89129
Attorney for
Kevin Gamble

13
14
15

Thomas N. Beckom, Esq

_/s/
______
Kristin A. Schuler-Hintz, Esq
Nevada Bar No. 7171
Thomas N. Beckom, Esq
Nevada Bar No. 12554
9510 West Sahara Avenue, Suite200
Las Vegas, Nevada 89117
Attorney for the Homeward Residential

16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED
October ______________, 2016
DATED this ____ day of13

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

_____________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE