Wulfenstein Construction Company, Inc. v. Herback General Engineering, LLC et al

Filing 22

ORDER granting 21 Stipulation; Discovery due by 7/1/2018. Motions due by 7/31/2018. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due no later than 30 days after the deadline for dispositive motions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 12/8/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

MICHAEL M. DELEE, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 11948
DELEE LAW OFFICES, LLC
P.O. Box 96, 18 South Powerline Road
Amargosa Valley, Nevada 89020
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
MICHAEL S. KIMMEL, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 09081
HOY CHRISSINGER KIMMEL VALLAS, PC
50 West Liberty Street, Suite 840
Reno, Nevada 89501
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

9
10

Attorneys for Wulfenstein
Construction Company, Inc.

11
12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

WULFENSTEIN CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INC., AND UNITED STATES
FOR THE USE OF WULFENSTEIN
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., a
Nevada corporation,
Plaintiff,
vs.
HERBACK GENERAL ENGINEERING, LLC,
a Nevada limited liability company;
TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY
COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Connecticut
corporation; DOES 1 – 10, inclusive,
Defendants.

23
24

)
)
) Case No. 2:17-cv-01182-APG-NJK
)
)
) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
) EXTEND DISCOVERY
) DEADLINES PENDING THE
) OUTCOME OF MEDIATION
)
)
(FIRST REQUEST)
)
)
)
)
)
)

This is the first stipulation to extend discovery deadlines. Pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR

25

26-4, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and request

26

that this Court extend discovery deadlines in this matter. In support of this Stipulation and

27

Request, the parties state as follows:

28

1

(a) Discoverty Completed to Date:

2

The parties have completed initial disclosures and document exchanges. The parties have

3

also engaged in written discovery, propounding requests for production, interrogatories, and

4

requests for admission, for which responses have been made. The parties are continuing to

5
6
7
8

discuss disputes related to the responses made to this initial round of written discovery and have
exchanged meet and confer positions on the items of dispute. The parties believe that any
disputes related to the initial round of written discovery can be resolved without court
intervention.
(b) Discovery that Remains to be Completed:

9
The parties contemplate taking the depositions of the principal employees of each party.
10
11
12
13

The parties also contemplate an additional round of written discovery, should the parties be
unable to resolve this dispute at mediation. Once completed, the parties will proceed with
obtaining expert witness opinions on the dates and time permitted herein. Some third-party
discovery may be required, through subpoenas or depositions.

14

(c) The reasons why discovery will not be completed prior to the existing deadlines.

15

Based on the initial disclosures and exchanges and upon the responses to written

16

discovery, the parties have agreed to (and have scheduled with Robert F Enzenberger, Esq.), a

17

mediation. An extension of the current discovery deadlines will allow the parties to privately

18

mediate the matter as contemplated in the Joint Interim Status Report [Dkt 20] (initial mediation

19

scheduled for December 15, 2017), will preserve the status quo, and will minimize the expense

20

of the parties’ resources and those of the Court until such mediation can be concluded.

21

Mediterranean Enterprises, Inc. v. Ssangyong Corp., 708 F.2d 1458, 1465 (9th Cir. 1983).

22

Additionally, it will prevent the risk of the court needlessly expending its energies to further

23
24
25
26

manage the case when the case may well settle as a result of the parties’ own accord at the
upcoming mediation. Sommers v. Cuddy, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12430 (D.Nev. 2013).
Discovery should be continued as stipulated between the parties to allow for a full and complete
effort to mediate this dispute. Because no trial date has yet been set by the Court in this matter,
and because the parties and their attorneys are available for trial in or after November of 2018, as

27
disclosed in the Joint Interim Status Report [Dkt 20], the extension requested is appropriate.
28
2

(d) Proposed Schedule for Completing remaining Discovery.

1

i.

2

The expert disclosure deadline should be extended up to and including April
30, 2018.

3
ii.

4

The rebuttal expert disclosure deadline should be extended up to and
including May 30, 2018.

5
iii.

6

The close of discovery deadline should be extended up to and including July
1, 2018.

7
iv.

8

The dispositive motion deadline should be extended up to and including July
31, 2018.

9
v.
10

The parties will file their joint pre-trial order (including FRCP 26(a)(3)
disclosures) no later than 30 days after the deadline for dispositive motions.

11

But, if there are dispositive motions pending at that time, the parties shall file

12

the joint pre-trial order 30 days after the Court has decided any pending

13

dispositive motions.

14

For the reasons stated herein, the parties hereby request the Court’s order affirming the

15

stipulated extension of the discovery deadlines to assist the parties in their effort to mediate this

16

matter.

17

DATED: December 7, 2017.

DATED: December 7, 2017.

18
DELEE LAW OFFICES, LLC

MOORE LAW GROUP, PC

/s/ Michael M. DeLee________
Michael M. DeLee, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 11948
Attorney for Plaintiff

/s/ John D. Moore______________
John D. Moore, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 8581
Attorney for Defendants

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27

December 8, 2017
DATED: _______________________

28
3