Zimmerman v. Starbucks Corporation
Filing
11
ORDER Granting 10 Stipulation to Extend Time. Starbucks Corporation answer due 7/31/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 7/11/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Whitney C. Wilcher, Esq.
The Wilcher Firm
Nevada State Bar No. 7212
8465 West Sahara Avenue Suite 111-236
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Email: wcw@nevadaada.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
Lynn V. Rivera, Nevada Bar No. 6797
BURNHAM BROWN
200 S. Virginia Street, 8th Floor
Reno, Nevada 89501
Telephone:
(775) 398-3065
Fax:
(877) 648-5288
Email: lrivera@burnhambrown.com
Attorneys for Defendant
STARBUCKS CORPORATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
11
12
No. 17-cv-01338 -GMN-GWF
Kevin Zimmerman, an individual,
13
Plaintiff,
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO
RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER
14
15
16
17
vs.
Starbucks Corporation,
Defendant.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
No. 17-cv-01338
1
Plaintiff KEVIN ZIMMERMAN (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant STARBUCKS
2
CORPORATION (“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”), through their counsel of record,
3
HEREBY STIPULATE and agree that Defendant’s deadline to respond to the Complaint in the
4
instant matter is extended to July 31, 2017.
5
This action is one of seven actions currently pending in this District in which Plaintiff
6
alleges denial of access at a Starbucks store. Those actions are: 17-cv-00976, 17-cv-00833, 17-
7
cv-00596, 17-cv-00834, 17-cv-00312, 17-cv-01201, and 17-cv-01338.
8
9
In each of these seven actions, the Parties are represented by the same counsel, and have
maintained a cooperative dialogue. In two of these actions, Defendant previously agreed to
10
waive service of the Complaint, placing Defendant’s responsive pleading deadline at July 17,
11
2017. The Parties then agreed to extend the responsive pleading deadline for all of the
12
remaining cases to that same date. In the interim, Plaintiff made global settlement demands to
13
Defendant, which include these seven actions as well as additional claims which have yet to be
14
filed in court. The Parties’ global settlement discussions are ongoing.
15
The Parties have now agreed to extend the responsive pleading deadline for all seven
16
pending cases to July 31. The Parties believe this extension is appropriate under the
17
circumstances, in order to permit the Parties to continue exploring a good faith, global resolution
18
prior to commencing further litigation to which the Parties and the Court would be required to
19
devote time and resources. Good cause exists for this extension, and the Parties respectfully
20
request that it be approved by the Court.
21
22
23
24
25
26
DATED: July 7, 2017
/s/ Whitney C. Wilcher, Esq.
Whitney C. Wilcher, Esq.
The Wilcher Firm
8465 West Sahara Avenue Suite 111-236
Las Vegas, NV 89117
702-466-1959
Email: wcw@nevadaada.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
27
28
2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
No. 17-cv-01338
1
DATED: July 7, 2017
2
BURNHAM BROWN
/s/ Lynn V. Rivera
Lynn V. Rivera
Attorneys for Defendant
STARBUCKS CORPORATION
3
4
5
6
7
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION
Upon consideration of the Stipulation of Plaintiff KEVIN ZIMMERMAN (“Plaintiff”)
8
and Defendant STARBUCKS CORPORATION (“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”), and
9
good cause appearing, the Court hereby orders as follows: Defendant’s responsive pleading is
10
due on or before July 31, 2017.
11
12
IT IS SO ORDERED:
13
14
_______________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DATED: _______________________
DATED: July 11, 2017
15
16
17
18
4821-3895-5083, v. 1
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
No. 17-cv-01338
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?