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)

Download PDF
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?