Wynn v. Bloom et al

Filing 27

ORDER Granting #22 First Stipulation for Extension of Time Re: #18 Special Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 6/1/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

Case 2:18-cv-00609-JCM-GWF Document 25 Filed 05/31/18 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

12
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89145
702.786.1001

PETERSON BAKER, PLLC

11

TAMARA BEATTY PETERSON, ESQ., Bar No. 5218
[e-mail]
NIKKI L. BAKER, ESQ., Bar No. 6562
[e-mail]
PETERSON BAKER, PLLC
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89145
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.786.1002
L. LIN WOOD, ESQ. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
NICOLE JENNINGS WADE, ESQ. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
G. TAYLOR WILSON, ESQ. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
1180 West Peachtree Street, Suite 2400
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 404.506.9111
Attorneys for Plaintiff Steve Wynn

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

15

STEVE WYNN, an individual,

16
17
18
19
20

v.

Plaintiff,

LISA BLOOM, an individual; and THE
BLOOM FIRM, a California Professional
Corporation,
Defendants.

Case No.: 2:18-cv-00609-JCM-GWF
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE: EXTENSION OF TIME FOR
PLAINTIFF TO FILE RESPONSE TO
DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL MOTION TO
DISMISS
(First Request)

21
22

Plaintiff Steve Wynn ("Mr. Wynn"), by and through his attorneys of record, Tamara Beatty

23

Peterson, Esq. and Nikki L. Baker, Esq., of Peterson Baker, PLLC, and L. Lin Wood, Esq., Nicole

24

Jennings Wade, Esq., and G. Taylor Wilson, Esq., of L. Lin Wood, P.C., and Defendants Lisa

25

Bloom and The Bloom Firm (collectively, the "Bloom Defendants"), by and through their

26

attorneys of record, Marc J. Randazza, Esq., Ronald D. Green, Esq., and Alex J. Shepard, Esq., of

27

the Randazza Legal Group, PLLC, hereby agree and stipulate, subject to the Court's approval, as

28

Case 2:18-cv-00609-JCM-GWF Document 25 Filed 05/31/18 Page 2 of 4

1
2

follows:
1.

On April 5, 2018, Mr. Wynn filed his "Complaint for Defamation" [ECF No. 1]

3

against the Bloom Defendants based on a press release they issued accusing Mr. Wynn of improper

4

acts relating to a former dancer in the Wynn Las Vegas show, "ShowStoppers."

5
6
7

2.

On May 8, 2018, the Bloom Defendants filed their "Answer and Affirmative

Defenses" [ECF No. 16].
3.

On May 15, 2018, the Bloom Defendants filed a "Special Motion to Dismiss

8

Pursuant to NRS 41.660" [ECF No. 18] and a "Request for Judicial Notice in Support of

9

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment Invoking the Substantive Portions of the Nevada Anti-

10

4.

In support of the anti-SLAPP Motion, the Bloom Defendants submitted twenty-five

12
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89145
702.786.1001

PETERSON BAKER, PLLC

11

SLAPP Statute, NRS 41.635 et seq." [ECF No. 19] (collectively, the "anti-SLAPP Motion").

(25) exhibits. (See ECF No. 18-2—18-27.) Six (6) of their exhibits are declarations, four (4) of

13

which are from third party witnesses testifying to facts purportedly bearing on the truth of the

14

statements at issue in this action and the knowledge of the Bloom Defendants regarding same.

15
16
17

5.

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-2(b), the Clerk's Office's docket states that Mr. Wynn's

response to the anti-SLAPP Motion is due on May 29, 2018.
6.

Mr. Wynn and the Bloom Defendants (collectively referred to, where appropriate,

18

as the "Parties") have not yet held a Rule 26(f) conference. Mr. Wynn's response to the anti-

19

SLAPP Motion is due prior to the deadline to hold any Rule 26(f) conference.

20

7.

Following receipt of the anti-SLAPP Motion, Mr. Wynn's counsel informed the

21

Bloom Defendants' counsel that Mr. Wynn intended to file a Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) motion to conduct

22

limited and necessary discovery, in the possession of the Bloom Defendants and third parties,

23

relevant to responding to the allegations in the anti-SLAPP Motion relating to falsity and actual

24

malice and, to this end, sought an extension of the deadline to file Mr. Wynn's response to the anti-

25

SLAPP Motion.

26
27

8.

The Parties are currently attempting to agree on the discovery Mr. Wynn may

conduct relating to the anti-SLAPP Motion consistent with Rule 56(d). If the Parties are unable to

28
2

Case 2:18-cv-00609-JCM-GWF Document 25 Filed 05/31/18 Page 3 of 4

1

reach an agreement on all discovery sought by Mr. Wynn, Mr. Wynn will file a Rule 56(d) motion

2

with the Court on the disputed discovery.

3

9.

To provide sufficient time for the Parties to brief and the Court to issue a decision

4

on any Rule 56(d) motion, the deadline for Mr. Wynn to file his response to the anti-SLAPP Motion

5

is extended as follows: (a) if the Court grants all or part of the Rule 56(d) motion, on the date set

6

by the Court's order; or (b) if the Court denies the Rule 56(d) motion in its entirety, within fourteen

7

(14) days after entry of the Court's order.

8

10.

If, however, the Parties are able to agree upon the limited discovery Mr. Wynn may

among other things, sets forth the stipulated discovery, sets a deadline to complete this discovery,

11

and establishes a reasonable briefing scheduling for Mr. Wynn's response to the anti-SLAPP

12
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89145
702.786.1001

conduct, the Parties will submit a stipulation and proposed order to the Court for approval, which,

10
PETERSON BAKER, PLLC

9

Motion and the Bloom Defendants' reply in support of the anti-SLAPP Motion.

13

11.

In order to "secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination" (see Fed. R.

14

Civ. P. 1) of the anti-SLAPP Motion and consistent with NRS 41.660(3)(e), a partial stay of

15

discovery is appropriate. In this regard, the Parties' obligation to hold a Rule 26(f) conference,

16

submit a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order pursuant to Local Rule 26-1(a), and

17

commence discovery is stayed pending a decision by the Court on the anti-SLAPP Motion, except

18

for limited discovery stipulated to by the Parties and/or permitted by the Court in response to any

19

Rule 56(d) motion filed by Mr. Wynn.

20

12.

Pending the filing of and decision on any Rule 56(d) motion, the Bloom Defendants

21

will permit Mr. Wynn to engage in certain agreed upon discovery concerning the facts raised by

22

the anti-SLAPP Motion.

23

13.

In light of the foregoing, the Parties submit that good cause exists for the Court to

24

approve this Stipulation, and respectfully request that, as set forth herein, the Court extend the time

25

//

26

//

27

//

28
3

Case 2:18-cv-00609-JCM-GWF Document 25 Filed 05/31/18 Page 4 of 4

1
2

for Mr. Wynn to file his response to the anti-SLAPP Motion.
Respectfully submitted this 29th day of May, 2018.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

12
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89145
702.786.1001

PETERSON BAKER, PLLC

11

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

PETERSON BAKER, PLLC

RANDAZZA LEGAL GROUP, PLLC

By:_/s/ Nikki L. Baker________________
TAMARA BEATTY PETERSON ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 5218
[e-mail]
NIKKI L. BAKER, ESQ., Bar No. 6562
[e-mail]
PETERSON BAKER, PLLC
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89145
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.786.1002

By:_/s/ Alex J. Shepard_______________
MARC J. RANDAZZA, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 12265
RONALD D. GREEN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 7360
ALEX J. SHEPARD, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 13582
2764 Lake Sahara Drive, Suite 109
Las Vegas, Nevada 89117
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 305.437.7662
[e-mail]

L. LIN WOOD, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
NICOLE JENNINGS WADE, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
G. TAYLOR WILSON, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
1180 West Peachtree Street, Suite 2400
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 404.506.9111

Attorneys for Defendants Lisa Bloom
and The Bloom Firm

Attorneys for Plaintiff Steve Wynn
IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22
23

____________________________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
June 1, 2018
DATED: _______________________

24
25
26
27
28
4