Thomson v. Russell Investment Management LLC et al

Filing 194

ORDER granting 193 Stipulation Regarding Deadline for Summary Judgment Motions. Motions due by 11/22/2024. Responses due by 12/20/2024. Replies due by 1/17/2025. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 8/29/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MAM)

1
2
3
4

D. Matthew Moscon (admitted pro hac vice)
Malori McGill Fery (admitted pro hac vice)
MAYER BROWN LLP
201 South Main Street, Suite 1100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Nancy G. Ross (admitted pro hac vice)
MAYER BROWN LLP
71 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Alex C. Lakatos (admitted pro hac vice)
MAYER BROWN LLP
1999 K Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20006-1101
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Patrick H. Hicks, Esq. Bar. No. 004632
Diana G. Dickinson, Esq. Bar No. 13477
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
3960 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 300
Las Vegas, NV 89169-5937
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Caesars Holdings, Inc.,
the Plan Investment Committee, and the
401(k) Plan Committee

19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

20
21
22
23

Danny Wanek, Juan Duarte, and Rick
Ruberton, as representatives of a class of
similarly situated persons, on behalf of the
Caesars Entertainment Corporation Savings
& Retirement Plan,

Case No. 2:21-cv-00961-CDS-BNW
STIPULATION REGARDING
DEADLINE FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT MOTIONS

24
Plaintiffs,
25
26
27
28

v.

(SECOND REQUEST REGARDING
SUBJECT DEADLINE)

Russell Investments Trust Company,
Caesars Holding, Inc., the Plan Investment
Committee, and the 401(k) Plan Committee,
Defendants.
STIPULATION REGARDING DEADLINE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS
CASE NO. 2:21-CV-00961

1

WHEREAS, the Court issued the original Scheduling Order in this case on October 12,

2

2021 (ECF No. 63), which listed placeholder dates to be adjusted based on the timing of the

3

Court’s decision on Defendants’ then-pending Motions to Dismiss;

4
5

WHEREAS, the Court issued an Amended Scheduling Order on April 20, 2023 (ECF No.
115) listing specific dates for each deadline;

6

WHEREAS, on December 29, 2023, the parties jointly requested (ECF No. 149) that the

7

Court extend the deadlines due to voluminous document productions and to allow additional time

8

to coordinate the schedules of the multiple parties required to conduct numerous fact witness

9

depositions;

10
11

WHEREAS, the Court granted the parties’ request on January 2, 2024 (ECF No. 150) and
entered an Amended Scheduling Order;

12

WHEREAS, on August 16, 2024, the parties filed (ECF No. 189) a stipulated request to

13

extend the deadline for expert discovery from September 6, 2024 to September 27, 2024 to allow

14

additional time to coordinate the schedules of the multiple parties required to conduct the

15

depositions of six expert witnesses;

16
17

WHEREAS, the Court granted the parties’ stipulation to extend the expert discovery
deadline on August 20, 2024 (ECF No. 190);

18

WHEREAS, the current deadline for any party to file a motion for summary judgment is

19

September 16, 2024, which falls approximately two weeks before the deadline for expert

20

discovery;

21

WHEREAS, when an existing motion deadline “cannot reasonably be met despite the

22

[parties’] diligence,” good cause exists to extend the deadline, Johnson v. Mammoth Recs., Inc.,

23

975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992), and “[t]he proper procedure, when additional time for any

24

purpose is needed is to present the Court a timely request for an extension before the time fixed

25

has expired,” Kinford v. Moyle, 2021 WL 3021150, at *2 (D. Nev. July 15, 2021) (quoting Canup

26

v. Miss. Valley Barge Line Co., 31 F.R.D. 282, 283 (D. Pa. 1962)).

27
28

-1STIPULATION REGARDING DEADLINE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS
CASE NO. 2:21-CV-00961

1

WHEREAS, the parties timely request an extension on the deadline to file motions for

2

summary judgment to allow adequate time to prepare such motions upon concluding expert

3

discovery and to conduct such matters as obtaining the transcripts of all expert depositions,

4

analyzing those transcripts, and adequately preparing their statement(s) of genuinely undisputed

5

materials facts and accompanying motion(s) with the benefit of expert discovery;

6

WHEREAS, although the current scheduling order does not set deadlines for a party’s

7

response or reply to a motion for summary judgment, the parties also respectfully request an

8

extension on the deadlines to file responses and replies to any motion for summary judgment

9

beyond those established by Local Rule 7-2(b) to account for the substantial amount of fact and

10

expert discovery that will affect such responses and replies;

11

WHEREAS, there is good cause to reasonably extend the deadline to file motions for

12

summary judgment and the deadlines to file responses and replies to any motion for summary

13

judgment and this request is not the result of unnecessary delay or a lack of diligence by any

14

party; and

15

WHEREAS, this is the second request for an extension of time affecting the deadline for

16

motions for summary judgment and the first request for an extension of time affecting the

17

deadlines for responses and replies to motions for summary judgment;

18

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, pursuant to Local Rules IA 6-1 and 26-

19

3 and subject to the approval of the Court, that the briefing schedule for summary judgment be

20

extended as follows:

21

Event

Existing Date

Proposed Date

22

Deadline to file motions for
summary judgment
Deadline to file responses to
motions for summary
judgment
Deadline to file replies to
motions for summary
judgment

September 16, 2024

November 22, 2024

October 7, 2024

December 20, 2024

October 21, 2024

January 17, 2025

23
24
25
26
27
28

-2STIPULATION REGARDING DEADLINE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS
CASE NO. 2:21-CV-00961

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Dated: August 27, 2024

/s/ D. Matthew Moscon
MAYER BROWN LLP
Nancy G. Ross (admitted pro hac vice)
71 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
D. Matthew Moscon (admitted pro hac vice)
Malori McGill Fery (admitted pro hac vice)
201 S. Main Street, Suite 1100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Alex C. Lakatos (admitted pro hac vice)
1999 K Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20006-1101
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
Patrick H. Hicks, Esq. Bar. No. 004632
Diana G. Dickinson, Esq. Bar No. 13477
3960 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5937
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Caesars Holdings,
Inc., the Plan Investment Committee, and the
401(k) Plan Committee

20
21

/s/ Robert C. Hora

22

MILBANK LLP
Sean M. Murphy, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Robert C. Hora, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
55 Hudson Yards, 34th Floor
New York, NY 10001-2163
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

23
24
25
26
27
28

PARSONS BEHLE & LATIMER
-3STIPULATION REGARDING DEADLINE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS
CASE NO. 2:21-CV-00961

1

Rew R. Goodenow, Esq., NSBN 3722
Michael R. Kealy, Esq., NSBN 971
50 West Liberty Street, Suite 750
Reno, NV 89501
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

2
3
4
5

Attorneys for Defendant Russell Investments
Trust Company

6
7

/s/ Benjamin J. Bauer

8
NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP
Paul J. Lukas, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Brock J. Specht, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Benjamin J. Bauer, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
4700 IDS Center
80 S. 8th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: [phone]

9
10
11
12
13

PAUL PADDA LAW, PLLC
Paul S. Padda, Esq. 4560 South Decatur Blvd.,
Suite 300
Las Vegas, NV 89103
Telephone: [phone]

14
15
16

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

DATED: _8/29/2024
_____________________

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

-4STIPULATION REGARDING DEADLINE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS
CASE NO. 2:21-CV-00961