Ashcraft v. Welk Resort Group, Corp. et al

Filing 29

ORDER:Based on the parties' stipulation 28 , this court's powers under FRCP 1, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stipulation 28 is GRANTED in part; ALL DEADLINES ARE STAYED until July 14, 2017, to permit the partie s to work out their deposition issues identified in the stipulation; Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint 24 is DENIED without prejudice to its refiling by July 14, 2017. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 6/22/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

Download PDF
Case 2:16-cv-02978-JAD-NJK Document 28 Filed 06/22/17 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Matthew I. Knepper, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12796 Miles N. Clark, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 13848 KNEPPER & CLARK LLC 10040 W. Cheyenne Ave., Suite 170-109 Las Vegas, NV 89129 Phone: (702) 825-6060 FAX: (702) 447-8048 Email: matthew.knepper@knepperclark.com Email: miles.clark@knepperclark.com David H. Krieger, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 9086 HAINES & KRIEGER, LLC 8985 S. Eastern Ave., Suite 350 Henderson, NV 89123 Phone: (702) 880-5554 FAX: (702) 385-5518 Email: dkrieger@hainesandkrieger.com 16 Sean N. Payne Nevada Bar No. 13216 PAYNE LAW FIRM LLC 9550 S. Eastern Ave. Suite 253-A213 Las Vegas, NV 89123 702-952-2733 Fax: 702-462-7227 Email: seanpayne@spaynelaw.com 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff 13 14 15 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 19 20 JOHN E. ASHCRAFT, Plaintiff, 21 v. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NAYLOR & BRASTER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89145 (702) 420-7000 WELK RESORT GROUP, CORP. and EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : : Case No. 2:16-cv-2978-JAD-NJK STIPULATION TO STAY RULING ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND AND OTHER MATTERS [FIRST REQUEST] ECF Nos. 24, 28 COMES NOW Plaintiff John Ashcraft (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (“Experian”), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby Case 2:16-cv-02978-JAD-NJK Document 28 Filed 06/22/17 Page 2 of 3 1 stipulate and agree as follows: 2 1. On May 3, 2017, Plaintiff took the 30(b)(6) deposition of Experian. 3 2. On May 9, 2017, and based in large part on Experian’s 30(b)(6) testimony, 4 Plaintiff moved for leave to amend his Complaint to add class allegations against 5 Experian under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., and NRS 6 598C. ECF Dkt. 24. 7 3. On May 23, 2017, Experian filed its response to the motion. ECF Dkt. 25. 8 4. On May 30, 2017, Plaintiff filed his reply in support of the motion. ECF Dkt. 26. 9 5. On June 14, 2017, Experian submitted a list of proposed changes to the deposition 10 testimony, as well as a list of confidential designations to the transcript itself. See 11 Exhibit 1. In that letter, Experian stated that because the revisions to the 30(b)(6) 12 testimony obviated a fact relied on in support of Plaintiff’s motion, Experian 13 invited Plaintiff to withdraw the pending motion to dismiss and offered 14 Experian’s witness for re-deposition, as well as to extend all relevant case 15 deadlines.1 16 6. On June 17, 2017, Plaintiff submitted a letter to Experian’s counsel, outlining 17 concerns with the revisions to Experian’s 30(b)(6) testimony, the confidential 18 designations made to the transcript, and other discovery-related matters. Exhibit 19 2. Therein, among other things, Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that he might be 20 moving to strike many of the revisions to the deposition testimony. Id. 21 7. 22 23 The parties have agreed to meet and confer on several of the issues outlined in his June 17, 2017 letter on Monday, June 26, 2017. 8. In the interim, the parties agree that until they are able to meet and confer on 24 matters related to Experian’s June 14, 2017 discovery letter and either agree to 25 resolve them among themselves or or seek judicial guidance on the same, they do 26 27 1 Plaintiff believes that the revisions implicate his proposed class claim under the FCRA, but not his proposed class claim under NRS 598C. 28 NAYLOR & BRASTER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89145 (702) 420-7000 2 of 3 Case 2:16-cv-02978-JAD-NJK Document 28 Filed 06/22/17 Page 3 of 3 1 not wish to burden the Court’s resources with adjudication of the motion for leave 2 to amend. 3 9. Therefore, the parties request that a ruling on the motion, as well as all relevant 4 case deadlines, be stayed until such time as the instant dispute regarding the 5 revised deposition testimony is reached. 6 10. If the parties are able to reach a resolution regarding these matters without Court 7 involvement, the parties will submit a stipulation informing the Court to that 8 effect and proposing a timetable for remaining case deadlines. 9 11. Good cause exists to grant the stay, because judicial economy is served by staying 10 the motion and conserving judicial resources while the parties attempt to resolve 11 this issue among themselves prior to asking the Court to adjudicate the motion. 12 Dated: June 22, 2017 13 NAYLOR & BRASTER KNEPPER & CLARK LLC By: /s/ Andrew J. Sharples Jennifer L. Braster Nevada Bar No. 9982 Andrew J. Sharples Nevada Bar No. 12866 1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89145 By: /s/ Miles N. Clark Matthew I. Knepper (NBN 12796) Miles N. Clark (NBN 13848) 10040 W. Cheyenne Ave., Suite 170-109 Las Vegas, NV 89129 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Attorneys for Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. David H. Krieger (NBN 9086) HAINES & KRIEGER, LLC 8985 S. Eastern Avenue, Suite 350 Henderson, NV 89123 Sean N. Payne (NBN 13216) PAYNE LAW FIRM LLC 9550 S. Eastern Ave., Suite 253-A213 Las Vegas, NV 89123 Attorneys for Plaintiff 24 ORDER 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. Based on the parties’ stipulation [ECF No. 28], this court’s powers under FRCP 1, 26 27 28 NAYLOR & BRASTER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89145 (702) 420-7000 and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stipulation [ECF No. 28] is Dated: __________, _____ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRANTED in part; ALL DEADLINES ARE STAYED until July 14, 2017, to permit the parties to work out their deposition issues identified in the stipulation; Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint [ECF No. 24] is DENIED without prejudice to its refiling by July 14, 2017. 3 of 3 __________________________________ U.S. District Judge Jennifer Dorsey 6-22-17

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?