Klatt v. Dignity Health
Filing
50
ORDER Granting 49 Stipulation for Extension of Time re 46 Order (Second Request). See Order for deadlines. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 6/11/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Lawrence J. Semenza, III, Esq., Bar No. 7174
Email: ljs@skrlawyers.com
Christopher D. Kircher, Esq., Bar No. 11176
Email: cdk@skrlawyers.com
Jarrod L. Rickard, Esq., Bar No. 10203
Email: jlr@skrlawyers.com
SEMENZA KIRCHER RICKARD
10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Telephone: (702) 835-6803
Facsimile: (702) 920-8669
Attorneys for Plaintiff Megan E. Klatt
And all others similarly situated
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
SEMENZA KIRCHER RICKARD
10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Telephone: (702) 835-6803
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
MEGAN E. KLATT, an individual, on behalf Case No. 2:17-cv-02425-RFB-PAL
of herself and all others similarly situated;
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
Plaintiff,
EXTEND THE DEADLINE TO
PROVIDE A STIPULATION TO THE
v.
COURT RELATING TO ECF NO. 46
DIGNITY
HEALTH,
a
California
corporation;
DOES
1-50,
unknown
individuals; and ROE COMPANIES 1-50,
unknown business entities,
18
Defendants.
19
20
Plaintiff Megan E. Klatt ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Dignity Health ("Defendant")
21
(together, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, submit this Stipulation
22
and Order to Extend the Deadline to Provide a Stipulation to the Court Relating to ECF No. 46
23
(the "Stipulation").
24
This Stipulation is submitted because Plaintiff and Defendant are continuing their attempts
25
to resolve the issues set forth in Defendant's Motion for Protective Order (the "Motion") (ECF
26
No. 40) and believe additional time is needed to do so.
27
On May 18, 2018 the Court required the Parties, no later than June 8, 2018, to submit a
28
stipulation notifying the Court of one of the following: (i) the Parties have reached agreement
1
1
regarding the issues in Defendant's Motion rendering Defendant’s Motion moot; (ii) the Parties
2
have not reached agreement regarding the issues raised in Defendant's motion resulting in an
3
agreed upon briefing schedule pertaining to all unresolved issues; or (iii) the parties seek
4
additional time to resolve the issues presented in Defendant's Motion (ECF No. 46).
The Parties hereby request an additional two weeks, up to and including June 22, 2018,
5
6
with which to provide the required stipulation.
This stipulation is submitted in good faith and not for the purpose of delay.
7
8
DATED this 8th day of June 2018.
DATED this 8th day of June 2018.
9
SEMENZA KIRCHER RICKARD
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
/s/ Lawrence J. Semenza, III
Lawrence J. Semenza, III, Esq., Bar No. 7174
Christopher D. Kircher, Esq., Bar No. 11176
Jarrod L. Rickard, Esq., Bar No. 10203
10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
/s/ Kirsten A. Milton, Esq.
Elayna J. Youchah, Esq., Bar No. 5837
Kirsten A. Milton, Esq., Bar No. 14401
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 600
Las Vegas, NV 89169
Attorneys for Plaintiff Wynn Las Vegas, LLC
Attorneys for Defendant Dignity Health
10
SEMENZA KIRCHER RICKARD
10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Telephone: (702) 835-6803
11
12
13
14
15
ORDER
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, the briefing schedule and the Court's consideration of
Defendant Dignity Health's Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 40) shall be stayed through and
including June 26, 2018. On or before the end of the day on June 22, 2018, Plaintiff and
Defendant shall submit a stipulation notifying Court that (i) identifies whether ECF No. 40 is
moot, (ii) provides the Court with a revised briefing schedule on remaining issues presented in
Defendant's Motion, or (iii) explains the need for more time to resolve issues addressed by ECF
No. 40.
23
24
25
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
26
27
DATED: June 11, 2018
28
2
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?