Universal Entertainment Corporation v. Aruze Gaming America, Inc. et al

Filing 593

ORDER Granting 592 Stipulation to Extend Deadlines re 533 Motion for Summary Judgment and 578 Motion to Seal. See Order for further details. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 9/15/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KF)

Download PDF
Case 2:18-cv-00585-RFB-NJK Document 593 Filed 09/15/22 Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Jay J. Schuttert, Esq. (Nevada Bar No. 8656) David W. Gutke, Esq. (Nevada Bar No. 9820) EVANS FEARS & SCHUTTERT LLP 6720 Via Austi Parkway, Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89119 Telephone: (702) 805-0290 Email: jschuttert@efstriallaw.com Email: dgutke@efstriallaw.com David S. Krakoff (pro hac vice) Preston Burton (pro hac vice) Lauren R. Randell (pro hac vice) Adam B. Miller (pro hac vice) Bradley Marcus (pro hac vice) BUCKLEY LLP 2001 M Street NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 349-8000 Email: dkrakoff@buckleyfirm.com Email: pburton@buckleyfirm.com Email: lrandell@buckleyfirm.com Email: amiller@buckleyfirm.com Email: bmarcus@buckleyfirm.com Bruce R. Genderson (pro hac vice) David M. Krinsky (pro hac vice) Adam D. Harber (pro hac vice) Nicholas Jordan (pro hac vice) WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP 680 Maine Avenue SW Washington, DC 20024 Telephone: (202) 434-5000 Email: bgenderson@wc.com Email: dkrinsky@wc.com Email: aharber@wc.com Email: njordan@wc.com Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendants 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 16 UNIVERSAL ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION, a Japanese corporation, 17 18 19 20 Plaintiff, vs. ARUZE GAMING AMERICA, INC., a Nevada corporation, KAZUO OKADA, an individual, Defendants. 21 22 ARUZE GAMING AMERICA, INC., a Nevada corporation, KAZUO OKADA, an individual, 23 Counter-Claimants, 24 25 26 27 28 vs. UNIVERSAL ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION, a Japanese corporation, ARUZE USA, a Nevada corporation, and JUN FUJIMOTO, an individual, Counter-Defendants. Case No.: 2:18-CV-00585 (RFB)(NJK) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME RE: REPLY IN SUPPORT OF UEC’S AND JUN FUJIMOTO’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING COUNTERCLAIM NO. 6 (DEFAMATION) AND RESPONSE TO ACCOMPANYING MOTION TO SEAL (SECOND REQUEST RE: REPLY) (FIRST REQUEST RE: RESPONSE TO MOTION TO SEAL) Case 2:18-cv-00585-RFB-NJK Document 593 Filed 09/15/22 Page 2 of 4 1 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties, that the time 2 for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Universal Entertainment Corporation (“UEC”) and Counter- 3 Defendant Jun Fujimoto to file their Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding 4 Counterclaim No. 6 (Defamation) (“Motion for Summary Judgement,” filed on July 29, 2022 – ECF 5 No. 533) is extended seven (7) days, from September 16, 2022 to September 23, 2022. This is the 6 second stipulation for an extension of time for the Reply brief. The Court previously approved the 7 parties’ first extension request on August 16, 2022 (ECF No. 546). 1 8 In addition, the deadline for UEC to respond to Defendants’ accompanying Motion to Seal 9 the Opposition (“Motion to Seal,” filed September 2, 2022, ECF No. 578) is extended until September 10 23, 2022. This is the first stipulation for an extension of time for the response to the Motion to Seal. 11 These extension requests are necessary to provide counsel additional time to evaluate the 12 allegations and exhibits associated with the Opposition and to coordinate these filings with Japanese- 13 based clients. Accordingly, for good cause showing, the parties have agreed to the foregoing 14 extensions. 15 Dated this 14th day of September, 2022. 16 EVANS FEARS & SCHUTTERT LLP HOLLAND & HART LLP By: By: /s/ Jessica E. Whelan J. Stephen Peek, Esq. (SBN 1758) Bryce K. Kunimoto, Esq. (SBN 7781) Jessica E. Whelan (SBN 14781) Erica C. Medley (SBN 13959) 9555 Hillwood Drive, 2nd Floor Las Vegas, NV 89134 17 18 19 20 21 /s/Jay J. Schuttert Jay J. Schuttert, Esq. (SBN 8656) David W. Gutke, Esq. (SBN 9820) 6720 Via Austi Parkway, Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89119 Bruce R. Genderson (pro hac vice) David M. Krinsky (pro hac vice) Adam Harber (pro hac vice) Nicholas Jordan (pro hac vice) WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP 725 Twelfth Street NW Washington, DC 20005 22 23 24 25 Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimants Aruze Gaming America, Inc. and Kazuo Okada Jeffrey S. Love (pro hac vice) Kristin L. Cleveland (pro hac vice) 26 27 28 1 Pursuant to the Court’s December 16, 2019 Order, within seven days of filing of a motion to seal the opposing party must file “either (1) a declaration establishing sufficient justification for sealing each document at issue or (2) a notice of withdrawal of the designation(s) and consent to unsealing.” ECF No. 132 at 2. 1 Case 2:18-cv-00585-RFB-NJK Document 593 Filed 09/15/22 Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 Caroline L. Desmond (pro hac vice) Ryan L. Frei (pro hac vice) KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP 121 SW Salmon St., Ste. 1600 Portland, OR 97204 David S. Krakoff (pro hac vice) Preston Burton (pro hac vice) Lauren R. Randell (pro hac vice) Adam Miller (pro hac vice) Bradley Marcus (pro hac vice) BUCKLEY LLP 2001 M Street NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant Aruze Gaming America, Inc. Attorneys for Plaintiff/CounterDefendants 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case 2:18-cv-00585-RFB-NJK Document 593 Filed 09/15/22 Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4 Universal Entertainment Corporation v. Aruze Gaming America, Inc., et al. Case No. 2:18-cv-00585-RFB-NJK Stipulation and Order to Extend Time re: Reply in Support of UEC’s and Jun Fujimoto’s Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Counterclaim No. 6 (Defamation) and Response to Accompanying Motion to Seal (Second Request re: Reply) (First Request re: Response to Motion to Seal) 5 6 7 ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 _____________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 September 15, 2022 DATED: _______________________________ Case No.: 2:18-CV-00585-RFB-NJK 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?