Dailey-Adams v. Albertson's LLC

Filing 17

ORDER granting 16 Stipulation; Discovery due by 11/23/2018. Motions due by 12/21/2018. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 1/21/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 8/16/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

Download PDF
Case 2:17-cv-02602-GMN-GWF Document 16 Filed 08/15/18 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Jack P. Burden, Esq. Nevada State Bar No. 6918 Xiao Wen Jin, Esq. Nevada State Bar No. 13901 BACKUS, CARRANZA & BURDEN 3050 South Durango Drive Las Vegas, NV 89117 T: (702) 872-5555 F: (702) 872-5545 jburden@backuslaw.com shirleyjin@backuslaw.com Attorneys for Defendant Albertson’s LLC 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 11 DANITA DAILEY-ADAMS, individually, 12 13 14 15 16 Case No. 2:17-cv-02602-GMN-GWF Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES (SECOND REQUEST) vs. ALBERTSON’S LLC; DOES I through X; inclusive; ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES I through X, inclusive, Defendants. 17 18 In accordance with Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the 19 District of Nevada (“LR”) 26-4, Defendant Albertson’s LLC (“Defendant”), by and through its 20 counsel of record, BACKUS, CARRANZA & BURDEN, and Plaintiff Danita Dailey-Adams 21 (“Plaintiff”), by and through her counsel of record, BERTOLDO BAKER CARTER & SMITH, hereby 22 stipulate and agree to an extension of all remaining discovery deadlines by sixty (60) days. The 23 parties propose the following revised discovery plan: 24 25 DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE The parties conducted an Initial Disclosure Conference pursuant to LR 26-1 and Fed. R. 1 Case 2:17-cv-02602-GMN-GWF Document 16 Filed 08/15/18 Page 2 of 3 1 Civ. P. 26(f) on November 28, 2017. In December 2017, the parties served their initial 2 disclosure of documents and the names of individuals with knowledge of the facts pertaining to 3 the claims set forth in this matter pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1). On February 28, 2018, 4 Defendant propounded interrogatories and requests for production of documents upon Plaintiff. 5 On March 29, 2018, Plaintiff responded to Defendant’s written discovery requests. Plaintiff’s 6 deposition was taken on May 7, 2018. The parties have made their initial expert disclosures on 7 July 25, 2018. DISCOVERY TO BE COMPLETED 8 The parties intend to depose representatives of Defendant, other percipient witnesses, 9 10 Plaintiff’s medical providers and experts. REASONS FOR EXTENSION TO COMPETE DISCOVERY 11 A mediation is scheduled for September 13, 2018. Thus, the parties seek a brief sixty- 12 13 day extension of the remaining discover deadlines to seek successful resolution of this case. This 14 request is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay. PROPOSED NEW DISCOVERY DEADLINES 15 Deadline to Amend Pleadings/Add Parties: Currently: March 27, 2018 Proposed: N/A 16 17 Interim Status Report: Currently: July 25, 2018 Proposed: N/A 18 19 Initial Expert Disclosure Deadline: Currently: July 25, 2018 Proposed: N/A 20 21 22 Rebuttal Expert Disclosure Deadline: Currently: August 27, 2018 Proposed: October 26, 2018 23 24 /// 25 2 Case 2:17-cv-02602-GMN-GWF Document 16 Filed 08/15/18 Page 3 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 Discovery Cutoff: Currently: Proposed: September 24, 2018 November 23, 2018 Deadline to File Dispositive Motions: Currently: October 23, 2018 Proposed: December 21, 2018 Pre-Trial Order Deadline: Currently: November 22, 2018 Proposed: January 21, 2019 7 DATED: August 15, 2018 DATED: August 15, 2018 8 BACKUS, CARRANZA & BURDEN BERTOLDO BAKER CARTER & SMITH /s/ Jack P. Burden Jack P. Burden, Esq. Xiao Wen Jin, Esq. 3050 South Durango Drive Las Vegas, NV 89117 Attorneys for Defendant /s/ Lawrence J. Smith Lawrence J. Smith, Esq. 7408 W. Sahara Avenue Las Vegas, NV 89117 Attorney for Plaintiff 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ORDER 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 DATED: this 16th day of of day August, 2018. , 2018. 19 20 21 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 3

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?