Inman v. Las Vegas Resort Holdings, LLC.

Filing 17

ORDER Granting 15 Stipulation re 1 Complaint (Second Request). Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 3/7/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Case 2:17-cv-02950-JAD-NJK Document 15 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Snell & Wilmer

L.L.P.
LAW OFFICES
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
702.784.5200

11

Alex L. Fugazzi, Esq. (Nevada Bar No. 9022)
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.784.5252
Email: [e-mail]
Douglas C. Rawles (pro hac vice to be filed)
Raffi Kassabian (pro hac vice to be filed)
REED SMITH LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel. [phone]
Fax. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant Las Vegas Resort Holdings,
LLC. d/b/a SLS Las Vegas a/k/a SLS Hotel & Casino
Las Vegas

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

13
14

IAN INMAN, an individual; on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated,

Case No.:

2:17-cv-02950-JAD-NJK

15
Plaintiffs,
16
v.
17
18
19
20

LAS VEGAS RESORT HOLDINGS, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company d/b/a SLS
LAS VEGAS a/k/a SLS HOTEL & CASINO
LAS VEGAS,

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT
TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT
(SECOND REQUEST)

Defendant.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1-

Case 2:17-cv-02950-JAD-NJK Document 15 Filed 03/02/18 Page 2 of 5

1

On November 28, 2017, Ian Inman ( “Plaintiff”) filed the instant case against Las Vegas

2

Resort Holdings, LLC. d/b/a SLS Las Vegas a/k/a SLS Hotel & Casino Las Vegas (“Defendant”),

3

alleging multiple causes of action premised on alleged violations of the Internet Tax Freedom Act

4

(“ITFA”) and the Clark County Transient Lodging Tax (“Transient Lodging Tax”). Relatedly,

5

counsel for Plaintiff filed the following nine additional lawsuits (the “Related Lawsuits”) in this

6

District Court:

7



8
9

2:17-cv-02841-APG-VCF (filed on November 10, 2017);


10

Snell & Wilmer

L.L.P.
LAW OFFICES
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
702.784.5200

11











24

Bowes et al. v. Nevada Property 1 LLC, Case No. 2:17-cv-02913GMN-VCF (filed on November 20, 2017);



22
23

Shapiro v. Treasure Island, LLC, Case No. 2:17-cv-02930-APG-CWH
(filed on November 22, 2017);

20
21

Chapman v. Penn National Gaming, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:17-cv02924-GMN-PAL (filed on November 21, 2017);

18
19

Phelps et al. v. MGM Resorts International et al., Case No. 2:17-cv02848-APG-CWH (filed on November 13, 2017);

16
17

Schnitzer et al. v. Wynn Resorts, Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-02868RFB-GWF (filed on November 15, 2017);

14
15

Martinez et al. v. Las Vegas Sands Corp. et al., Case No. 2:17-cv02859-APG-NJK (filed on November 14, 2017);

12
13

Cabral et al. v. Caesars Entertainment Corporation et al., Case No.

DiNino v. Four Seasons Hotels Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-2961-JAD-GWF
(filed on November 29, 2017); and



Robinson v. Westgate Resorts Inc., Case No. 2:18-cv-95 (before Judge
Dorsey) (filed on January 17, 2018).

25

Each of the lawsuits filed by counsel for Plaintiffs, including the instant case (collectively,

26

the “Resort Fee Lawsuits”), contains virtually identical allegations and requests for relief. Each

27

case will also likely involve a similar determination of whether the adjudicating court has subject

28

matter jurisdiction over the action.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42 allows for the
-2-

Case 2:17-cv-02950-JAD-NJK Document 15 Filed 03/02/18 Page 3 of 5

1

consolidation of multiple cases for the limited purpose of resolving common questions of law,

2

including a determination of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. 42(a)(1); see also

3

Beddoe v. United States, 1993 WL 134827, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 1993) (consolidating cases

4

under Rule 42(a) for the purpose of evaluating subject matter jurisdiction).

of subject matter jurisdiction, the parties to the Resort Fee Lawsuits have entered into a separate

7

agreement (the “Agreement”), attached hereto as Exhibit 1. The purpose of the Agreement is to

8

consolidate the issue of subject matter jurisdiction and file a single motion on that issue in the

9

first filed case before Judge Gordon, specifically: Cabral et al. v. Caesars Entertainment

10

Corporation et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-02841-APG-VCF (the “Caesars Case”). In order to address

11

Snell & Wilmer

In an effort to avoid duplicative legal briefing and to efficiently address the common issue

6

L.L.P.
LAW OFFICES
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
702.784.5200

5

the issue of subject matter jurisdiction in an efficient manner, the Agreement sets forth that the

12

defendants to the Resort Fee Lawsuits shall coordinate to present a single motion to dismiss on

13

the basis of subject matter jurisdiction (the “Subject Matter Jurisdiction Motion”) that will be

14

filed by the Caesars entities in the Caesars Case. Additionally, the parties in the Resort Fee

15

Lawsuits that are presently before Judge Gordon also agreed to consolidate their respective cases

16

for the purpose of allowing Judge Gordon to decide the issue of subject matter jurisdiction in one

17

consolidated brief.

18

On February 22, 2018, Judge Gordon entered an order granting the stipulations in the

19

cases before him, staying all deadlines and consolidating the cases already assigned to him solely

20

for the purpose of ruling on the Subject Matter Jurisdiction Motion. [Dkt. # 21].

21

For judicial efficiency, the parties in all other cases, including the Plaintiff herein, met and

22

conferred and collectively agreed to stay their respective cases pending guidance on the Subject

23

Matter Jurisdiction Motion in the Caesars Case, recognizing that any order entered in the Caesars

24

Case is discretionary and not binding on this Court.

25
26

Pursuant to that Agreement, Plaintiff and the Defendant, by and through their undersigned
counsel, HEREBY STIPULATE that:

27
28
-3-

Case 2:17-cv-02950-JAD-NJK Document 15 Filed 03/02/18 Page 4 of 5

1

1.

Defendant’s deadline to file a response to Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) shall

2

be extended to 30 days from the date that the Court in the Caesars Case issues a final ruling on

3

the Subject Matter Jurisdiction Motion;

4

2.

If the Court in the Caesars Case grants the Subject Matter Jurisdiction Motion,

5

then Plaintiff shall move this Court for a voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the action or

6

file a stipulation further staying the proceeding pending appeal, should Plaintiff appeal.

7
8

3.

If the Court in the Caesars Case denies the Subject Matter Jurisdiction Motion,

then the Defendant will not re-file the Subject Matter Jurisdiction Motion in this case.

warranted because they conserve judicial and party resources by allowing for an efficient

11

Snell & Wilmer

These stipulations are made in agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant and are

10

L.L.P.
LAW OFFICES
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
702.784.5200

9

determination of common issues of law that exist in multiple related lawsuits. Plaintiff reserves

12

all rights to seek coordination or consolidation with respect to issues other than subject matter

13

jurisdiction at a later date. Pursuant to the Agreement, filing of the Subject Matter Jurisdiction

14

Motion does not constitute a waiver of any defense or argument and shall not preclude Defendant

15

from asserting any additional defenses or arguments at a later date, including,

16

///

17

///

18

///

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-

Case 2:17-cv-02950-JAD-NJK Document 15 Filed 03/02/18 Page 5 of 5

1

without limitation, any defenses or motions permitted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) or

2

a motion to compel arbitration.

3
4

Dated: March 1, 2018

Dated: March 2, 2018

5

WOLF, RIFKIN, SHAPIRO, SCHULMAN &
RABKIN

SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.

/s/ Don Springmeyer
Don Springmeyer (NV Bar. 1021)
Bradley Schrager (NV Bar 10217)
3556 E. Russell Road, 2nd Floor
Las Vegas, NV 89120-2234

/s/ Alex L. Fugazzi
Alex L. Fugazzi (NV Bar No. 9022)
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, NV 89169

6
7
8
9
10

Snell & Wilmer

L.L.P.
LAW OFFICES
3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
702.784.5200

11
12
13
14

Douglas C. Rawles (pro hac vice to be filed)
Raffi Kassabian (pro hac vice to be filed)
REED SMITH LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90071

Frank B. Ulmer (admitted pro hac)
McCULLEY McCLUER PLLC
1022 Carolina Blvd., Suite 300
Charleston, SC 29451

Attorneys for Defendant Las Vegas Resort
Holdings, LLC. d/b/a SLS Las Vegas a/k/a SLS
Hotel & Casino Las Vegas

Joshua T. Ripley (admitted pro hac)
BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
1622 Locust Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103

15
16

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20
21
22

3/7/2018
Dated: ________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE OR
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
4844-9243-3758

23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-