Rivera v. Daniel Bogden, et al

Filing 44

SCHEDULING ORDER granting 43 Unopposed Motion. Discovery due by 4/2/2019. Motions due by 5/4/2019. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 6/3/2019. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 1/9/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 1 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6

MATTHEW Q. CALLISTER, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No.: 1396
MITCHELL S. BISSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No.: 011920
CALLISTER LAW GROUP
330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, NV 89104
Tel. No.: [phone]
Fax No.: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9

330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

CALLISTER LAW GROUP

10

RUDY RIVERA, an individual;
Plaintiff,

11
12
13

v.
DANIEL BOGDEN, et al.;

Case No.: 2:17-02776-JCM-NJK
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND
DEADLINES SET FORTH IN JOINT
DISCOVERY PLAN AND
SCHEDULING ORDER
(SECOND REQUEST)

Defendants.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Plaintiff RUDY RIVERA (“Plaintiff”) by and through his counsel of record,
MATTHEW CALLISTER, ESQ. and MITCHELL S. BISSON, ESQ. with CALLISTER LAW
GROUP, in accordance with LR 26-4 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States
District Court, District of Nevada, hereby requests that the remaining discovery deadlines be
extended sixty (60) days. Defendant, CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA
(“CoreCivic”), by and through its counsel of record, JACOB B. LEE, ESQ. with the law firm
of STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO and GINA WINSPEAR, ESQ. with the law
firm of DENNETT WINSPEAR do not oppose this Motion. This is the second overall request
to extend the deadlines made in this matter, but the first request to extend the deadline for close
of discovery. The prior request to extend discovery was related to expert disclosures only.
This unopposed Motion is made and based on the following points and authorities, the
pleadings and papers on file, and any additional evidence the Court deems appropriate to
consider.
PAGE 1 OF 8

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 2 of 8

I.

1
2
3

BACKGROUND/FACTS

On or about April 17, 2018, the Court issued an Amended Discovery Plan and
Scheduling Order [Dkt. 27], setting forth the following relevant dates/deadlines:

4

Deadline to Amend Pleadings:

July 5, 2018

5

Disclosure of Initial Experts:

August 6, 2018 (Plaintiff)
September 20, 2018 (Defendant)

6

November 5, 2018

Close of Discovery:

February 1, 2019

9

Dispositive Motions:

March 5, 2019

10
330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

Disclosure of Rebuttal Experts:

8

CALLISTER LAW GROUP

7

Joint Proposed Pretrial Order:

April 4, 2019, or 30 days after resolution

11

of dispositive motions

12

Thereafter, in August 2018, this Honorable Court granted a Stipulation and Order [Dkt.

13

31], extending the deadlines for both parties’ initial experts and rebuttal experts only. No other

14

deadlines have previously been extended. As such, the current relevant dates are as follows:

15

Deadline to Amend Pleadings:

July 5, 2018 (PASSED)

16

Disclosure of Initial Experts:

September 5, 2018 (Plaintiff) (PASSED)
October 22, 2018 (Defendant) (PASSED)

17
18

Disclosure of Rebuttal Experts:

December 4, 2018 (PASSED)

19

Close of Discovery:

February 1, 2019

20

Dispositive Motions:

March 5, 2019

21

Joint Proposed Pretrial Order:

April 4, 2019, or 30 days after resolution

22

of dispositive motions

23

Plaintiff now files this unopposed Motion to request an additional sixty (60) day

24

extension of the remaining deadlines. Specifically, Plaintiff requests that the discovery cutoff

25

date be extended sixty days from February 1, 2019 to April 2, 2019. Further, Plaintiff requests

26

the dispositive motion deadline be extended sixty days from March 5, 2019 to May 4, 2019 and

27

the Joint Proposed Pretrial Order be due June 3, 2019 or 30 days after resolution of dispositive

28

motions.

PAGE 2 OF 8

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 3 of 8

1

As described below, this matter involves out of state counsel, hundreds of hours of

2

recorded jail phone calls to filter through, thousands of pages of disclosed documentation, and

3

multiple out of state witnesses and expert witnesses. While a majority of the necessary

4

discovery has been completed, Plaintiff still needs to depose approximately four (4) of

5

Defendant’s employees. Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendant’s counsel have already discussed the

6

witness’ availability, and unfortunately said witnesses are not available for deposition until mid-

7

February. In order to accommodate this, the close of discovery will need to be extended.

8

The undersigned discussed the instant Motion with Defendant’s counsel, and

9

Defendant’s counsel has stated they do not oppose a sixty (60) day extension of the remaining

330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

CALLISTER LAW GROUP

10

deadlines.

11
II.

12

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION

13

Local Rule 26-4 states:

14

22

A motion or stipulation to extend any date set by the discovery plan, scheduling
order, or other order must, in addition to satisfying the requirements of LR IA 61, be supported by a showing of good cause for the extension. A motion or
stipulation to extend a deadline set forth in a discovery plan must be received by
the court no later than 21 days before the expiration of the subject deadline. A
request made within 21 days of the subject deadline must be supported by a
showing of good cause. A request made after the expiration of the subject deadline
will not be granted unless the movant also demonstrates that the failure to act was
the result of excusable neglect. A motion or stipulation to extend a discovery
deadline or to reopen discovery must include:
(a) A statement specifying the discovery completed;
(b) A specific description of the discovery that remains to be completed;
(c) The reasons why the deadline was not satisfied or the remaining
discovery was not completed within the time limits set by the discovery plan; and
(d) A proposed schedule for completing all remaining discovery.

23

Plaintiff sets forth the requirements of LR 26-4 and discusses the same below. This

24

Motion is being filed more than 21 days before the expiration of any of the deadlines sought to

25

be extended. This Motion is not being made for the purpose of delay, and as discussed below,

26

good cause exists to extend the remaining discovery deadlines. As such, this Court should grant

27

the requested extension.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

28

PAGE 3 OF 8

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 4 of 8

1

A. STATEMENT SPECIFYING DISCOVERY COMPLETED (LR 26-4(a))

2

The Rule 26(f) conference was held on March 21, 2018. Following the Rule 26(f)

3

conference, the proposed Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order was filed on April 10,

4

2018. An Amended Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order was filed on April 16,

5

2018. The Court approved the Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order on April 17,

6

2018. The Court approved the Stipulation and Order to Extend Deadlines Set Forth in Joint

7

Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (First Request) on August 7, 2018 and extended the

8

expert deadlines.

330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

Defendant exchanged initial disclosures on April 9, 2018 and Plaintiff exchanged initial

10
CALLISTER LAW GROUP

9

disclosures on April 10, 2018. Both sides have served supplemental disclosures. On July 17,

11

2017, Defendant propounded Interrogatories, Requests for Admissions and Request for

12

Production upon Plaintiff to which Plaintiff responded on August 20, 2018. Throughout the

13

following months, the parties held multiple meet and confers regarding Plaintiff’s responses

14

and whether any supplements/amendments were necessary. After said discussions, Plaintiff

15

submitted amended written discovery responses on October 9, 2018 and again on November

16

30, 2018.

17

Defendant has additionally served numerous subpoenas on Plaintiff’s former employers,

18

experts, and other third parties. Most subpoenas have been responded to and the documents

19

have been disclosed to the parties.

20

As far as expert disclosures go, both parties have previously disclosed their experts and

21

expert reports. On September 5, 2018, Plaintiff disclosed its initial experts, Roger Clark and

22

Terrance Clauretie. On or about October 22, 2018, Defendant disclosed Captain A. McCauley

23

as its expert witness.

24

On December 3, 2018, Plaintiff served his Requests for Production of Documents and

25

Requests for Interrogatories to Defendant. Upon Defendant’s request for additional time to

26

respond to said written discovery, Plaintiff agreed to make the responses due January 11, 2019.

27

Additionally, Defendant has noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for January 22, 2019.

28

PAGE 4 OF 8

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 5 of 8

1

B. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE
COMPLETED (LR26-4 (b))

2

Plaintiff will need to depose Defendant’s expert – Captain McCauley. Furthermore,

3

Defendant is still awaiting responsive documentation related to a subpoena duces tecum served

4

on Plaintiff’s expert Roger Clark. Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendant’s counsel are currently

5

attempting to resolve this issue.

6

Additionally, Plaintiff needs to take the depositions of three percipient witnesses, one

7

of which is in Texas and two of which are unavailable until mid-February 2019 – after the

8

current close of discovery.

330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

Currently, Defendant intends to provide responses to Plaintiff’s written discovery

10
CALLISTER LAW GROUP

9

requests on January 11, 2019. Plaintiff may need to serve an additional set of written discovery

11

after reviewing the responses to the first set.

12
13

C. REASONS FOR REQUESTED EXTENSION (LR26-4 (c))

14

The parties need additional time to coordinate, schedule and take the various depositions

15

as the deponents are out-of-state or otherwise unavailable until after the current close of

16

discovery - February 1, 2019. Moreover, as part of the discovery process, Defendant disclosed

17

hundreds of hours of recorded jail phone calls that took Plaintiff’s counsel an extensive amount

18

of time to listen to and analyze. While upon first glance it may appear that minimal discovery

19

was conducted by Plaintiff during the first half of the discovery period, the reality is that

20

Plaintiff’s counsel spent a majority of the initial discovery period listening to hundreds of hours

21

of these calls and analyzing their content. This task took months to complete and slowed down

22

the discovery process.

23

This matter involves out of state counsel, an out of state Plaintiff, hundreds of hours of

24

recorded jail phone calls to filter through, thousands of pages of disclosed documentation, and

25

multiple out of state witnesses and expert witnesses. While a majority of the necessary

26

discovery has been completed, Plaintiff requests that an additional sixty (60) days to complete

27

anything remaining.

28

PAGE 5 OF 8

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 6 of 8

1

As discussed above, there have been no prior extensions of the discovery cutoff date –

2

the only prior extension was related to the expert disclosures only. Further, Plaintiff’s counsel

3

has discussed this Motion and the requested extension with Defendant’s counsel, and Defendant

4

does not oppose the granting of this Motion or the sixty (60) day extension. Therefore, Plaintiff

5

submits that there is good cause to extend the remaining deadlines as set forth below.

6
7
8

D. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING DISCOVERY (LR26-4 (d))
Pursuant to LR 26-4, Plaintiff proposes (and Defendant does not oppose) to extend the
current deadlines as follows:

330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

1. Discovery Cut-Off Date: The current deadline to complete discovery is

10
CALLISTER LAW GROUP

9

February 1, 2019. Plaintiff proposes extending this deadline up to and including

11

April 2, 2019;

12

2. Deadline for Amending the Pleadings and Adding Parties: The current

13

deadline to amend the pleadings and add parties has passed, and the parties do

14

not request to reopen this deadline.

15

3. Interim Status Report: The current deadline to file a Joint Interim Status

16

Report has passed, and the parties do not need deem it necessary to file another

17

report upon extending the discovery cutoff date.

18

4. Expert Disclosures: The current deadline for expert disclosures has passed,
and the parties do not request to reopen this deadline.

19
20
21

5.

Rebuttal Experts: The current deadline for rebuttal expert disclosures has
passed, and the parties do not request to reopen this deadline.

22

6. Dispositive Motions: The current deadline to file dispositive Motions is March

23

5, 2019. Plaintiff proposes extending this deadline up to and including May 4,

24

2019

25

7. Pre-Trial Order and Pre-Trial Disclosures: The current date the parties

26

shall file the joint pretrial order, including FRCP 26(a)(3) pre-trial

27

disclosures, is April 4, 2019. Plaintiff proposes extending this deadline up to

28

and including June 3, 2019. If dispositive motions are filed, the deadline for

PAGE 6 OF 8

Case 2:17-cv-02776-JCM-NJK Document 43 Filed 01/09/19 Page 7 of 8

1

filing the joint pretrial order will be suspended until 30 days after decision on

2

the dispositive motions.

3

II.

4

CONCLUSION

As set forth above, Defendant does not oppose the motion/extension, the motion is filed

5
more than 21 days prior to the expiration of the relevant deadlines, and the motion is made in
6
7
8
9

330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
T: [phone] F: [phone]

CALLISTER LAW GROUP

10

good faith and not for the purposes of delay. Based upon the foregoing, Plaintiff requests that
this Court GRANT the instant unopposed motion to extend the remaining discovery dates.
DATED this 9th day of January, 2019.
CALLISTER LAW GROUP

11

/s/ Mitchell S. Bisson, Esq.
MITCHELL S. BISSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 011920
330 E. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, NV 89104
Attorneys for Plaintiff

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED:
NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS
WILL BE GRANTED.
____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
January 9, 2019
DATED: __________________

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PAGE 7 OF 8