Leoni v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al
Filing
11
ORDER Granting 10 Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines. If dispositive motions are filed, the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order will be suspended until 30 days after decision on the dispositive motions or further court order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 7/28/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Jennifer L. Braster
Nevada Bar No. 9982
Andrew J. Sharples
Nevada Bar No. 12866
NAYLOR & BRASTER
1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89145
(T) (702) 420-7000
(F) (702) 420-7001
jbraster@naylorandbrasterlaw.com
asharples@naylorandbrasterlaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant
Experian Information Solutions, Inc.
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
11
DAVID LEONI,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
Case No. 2:17-cv-01408-RFB-VCF
v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC. and MILITARY STAR,
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND
DISCOVERY DEADLINES
[First Request]
Defendants.
16
17
Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, Plaintiff and Experian Information Solutions, Inc., by and
18
through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and request that this Court extend the
19
motion to amend deadline by fifty (50) days. At this time, the parties are not seeking an extension
20
of any other discovery deadlines but reserve the right to request in the future. In support of this
21
Stipulation and Request, the parties state as follows:
22
I.
DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE
23
Presently, the active parties to this case are Plaintiff and Experian Information Solutions,
24
Inc. (“Experian”), and as such, the recitation of discovery shall be with respect to Plaintiff and
25
Experian.
26
1.
Plaintiff filed the instant complaint on May 18, 2017.
27
2.
On June 12, 2017, Experian filed its answer.
28
NAYLOR & BRASTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89145
(702) 420-7000
1
3.
On June 23, 2017, the parties held the Rule 26 Conference.
2
4.
On June 23, 2017, Plaintiff served Experian with requests for admission, requests
3
for production of documents, and interrogatories. Experian responded on July 24, 2017.
4
5.
On June 23, 2017, Plaintiff served Experian with a notice of deposition, setting the
5
deposition of Experian’s 30(b)(6) designee for August 1, 2017. Experian’s witness is not available
6
on August 1, 2017, but is available on September 15, 2017. Plaintiff’s counsel has agreed to this
7
date provided the parties stipulate to the extension of the motion to amend deadline until 50 days
8
after the renoticed deposition date and Plaintiff’s deposition occurs after Experian’s deposition.
9
6.
On July 5, 2017, the parties submitted a proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling
11
7.
On July 6, 2017, the Stipulated Protective Order was entered.
12
8.
On July 25, 2017, Experian served its initial disclosures.
13
9.
On July 26, 2017, Plaintiff served his initial disclosures.
10
14
Order.
B.
15
16
1.
The deposition of Experian’s 30(b)(6) witness, which Plaintiff has agreed to
renotice for September 15, 2017;
17
18
Specific Description of Discovery that Remains to be Completed
2.
The deposition of Plaintiff, which Experian has agreed to renotice for a date after
Experian’s rescheduled deposition;
19
3.
Depositions of remaining parties and witnesses; and,
20
4.
Any necessary additional written discovery.
21
C.
22
Reasons Why the Remaining Discovery Was Not Completed
The parties aver, pursuant to LR 6-1, that good cause exists for the requested extension.
23
At this juncture, the discovery close is December 11, 2017.1
24
discovery deadlines is made well in advance of the applicable discovery deadlines and is made to
25
accommodate the availability of Experian’s 30(b)(6) designee on September 15, 2017, and
This stipulation to extend the
26
27
28
NAYLOR & BRASTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89145
(702) 420-7000
1
Court.
This is based on the Proposed Discovery Plan (ECF No. 7), which stands submitted to the
2 of 4
1
Plaintiff’s request, and the parties’ agreement, to extend the motion to amend pleadings deadline
2
such that the motion to amend pleadings deadline will now be approximately fifty (50) days after
3
Experian’s rescheduled deposition, or November 6, 2017. At this time, the parties do not request
4
an extension of any other discovery deadlines, but only an extension of the motion to amend
5
deadline. The parties reserve the right to seek an extension of other deadlines in the future.
6
D.
Proposed Discovery Deadlines
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Event
Close of Discovery
Current Deadline2
December 11, 2017
Proposed New Deadline
Same
Deadline to Amend Pleadings
September 11, 2017
November 6, 2017
Deadline to Disclose Initial
Experts
October 10, 2017
Same
Deadline to Disclose Rebuttal
Experts
November 9, 2017
Same
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NAYLOR & BRASTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89145
(702) 420-7000
2
See n. 1.
3 of 4
1
2
Dispositive Motions
January 8, 2018
Same
Pre-Trial Order
February 7, 2018
Same
3
Dated: July 27, 2017
4
NAYLOR & BRASTER
KNEPPER & CLARK, LLC
By: /s/ Jennifer L. Braster
Jennifer L. Braster (NBN 9982)
Nevada Bar No. 9982
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
5
6
7
8
9
David H. Krieger
Nevada Bar No. 9086
HAINES & KRIEGER, LLC
8985 S. Eastern Avenue, Suite 350
Henderson, NV 89123
Attorneys for Defendant Experian
Information Solutions, Inc.
10
11
12
13
If dispositive motions are filed, the deadline
for filing the joint pretrial order will be
suspended until 30 days after
decision on the dispositive motions or further
court order.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
14
15
ORDER
16
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 28, 2017
Dated: __________, _____
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NAYLOR & BRASTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89145
(702) 420-7000
4 of 4
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?