Ramos et al v. Giltner Transportation, Inc. et al

Filing 29

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that ECF No. 27 is DENIED as duplicative of ECF No. 26 . It appears the parties accidentally filed the same stipulation to extend discovery twice, as opposed to filing a stipulation for a Rule 35 exam. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 5/9/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LOE)

Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 27 Filed 05/05/22 Page 1 of 6
29
05/09/22
5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

MICHAEL C. HETEY, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 5668
HAROLD J. ROSENTHAL, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10208
THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK
BALKENBUSH & EISINGER
1100 East Bridger Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89101-5315
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.;
GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.;
and GILTNER, INC.

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12

VICTORIANO RAMOS; THERESA RAMOS,

13

Plaintiffs,

14

vs.

15

GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.;
GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.;
GILTNER, INC.; PROGRESSIVE
LOGISTICS, INC.; GARY ROBERT NAIR;
DOES 1-200; and ROES 201-300,

16
17

CASE NO. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW

18

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
(THIRD REQUEST)

Defendants.

19
20

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
(SECOND REQUEST)

21

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs

22
23

VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA RAMOS and Defendants GILTNER

24

TRANSPORTATION, INC.; GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.; and GILTNER, INC.,

25

by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, pursuant to Local Rule 26-1,

26

that discovery and related deadlines be extended 120 days. This is the Parties’ Third Request

27

for a continuance of discovery deadlines.

28

///
-1Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al.
Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Third Request)

Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 27 Filed 05/05/22 Page 2 of 6
29
05/09/22
5

1

I.

SUMMARY OF THE CASE
This case arises out of a collision between a tractor-trailer and Toyota 4Runner on May

2
3

14, 2019 on US-93 at or near Mile Marker 63. At the time of the accident, Plaintiffs

4

VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA RAMOS were residents of the State of California,

5

County of Los Angeles. Defendants GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC. and GILTNER

6

LOGISTICS, INC. are Idaho Corporations. Defendant GILTNER, INC. was an Idaho

7

Corporation which has been inactive since January 2, 2001. Plaintiffs named GARY NAIR as

8

a Defendant; however, he has since been dismissed as he is deceased as of July 13, 2020.
On May 7, 2021, Plaintiffs VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA RAMOS filed a

9
10

Complaint in the Eighth Judicial District Court for Clark County Nevada alleging causes of

11

action for Negligence – Personal Injuries; and Negligent Hiring, Retention, Training and

12

Supervision. Defendants GILTNER LOGISTICS, INC. and GILTNER, INC. were served by

13

Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested and received the Summons and Complaint on July 6,

14

2021 and Defendant GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC. was personally served on July 21,

15

2021. On August 4, 2021, Defendants filed a Petition for Removal to Federal Court [ECF No.

16

1] and the matter was thereafter removed to Federal Court and assigned to the Honorable Judge

17

Richard F. Boulware, II. Also, on August 4, 2021, Defendants filed their Answer to Complaint

18

[ECF No. 7]. On August 20, 2021, Plaintiffs filed the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order

19

[ECF No. 9]. On September 22, 2021, Defendants filed a Stipulation and Order for Dismissal

20

Without Prejudice of Defendant Gary Robert Nair Only [ECF No. 14] and the Court granted

21

same on September 23, 2021 [ECF No. 15].

22

II.

DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE

23

The Parties have served Initial Disclosures and documents.

24

The Parties have propounded Discovery Requests.

25

Plaintiffs responded to Discovery Requests.

26

Defendants responded to Discovery Requests.

27

///

28

///
-2Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al.
Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Third Request)

Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 27 Filed 05/05/22 Page 3 of 6
29
05/09/22
5

1

III.

DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED

2

Custodian of Records Subpoenas Duces Tecum to each of the Plaintiffs’ various

3

providers;

4

Supplement FRCP 26(a)(1) Disclosures;

5

Retain and Designate Experts and Rebuttal Experts;

6

Depositions of the Parties;

7

Depositions of Fact Witnesses;

8

Depositions of Plaintiffs’ Treating Physicians;

9

Depositions of Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ Expert Witnesses;

10

Independent Medical Examinations of the Plaintiffs; and

11

Additional discovery yet to be determined may be necessary.

12
13

IV.

REASONS WHY THE PARTIES ARE REQUESTING EXTENSION
Plaintiffs reside in Los Angeles, California. Plaintiff VICTORIANO RAMOS is

14

alleging a significant Traumatic Brain Injury as a result of the underlying accident and the

15

Parties need to gather his medical records and films as part of the discovery process in this case.

16

Due to Plaintiff VICTORIANO RAMOS’ injuries his attorneys have had significant delays in

17

getting their clients to sign the necessary medical authorizations to allow Defendants to request

18

his medical records including the films. These records and films are necessary for both parties

19

due to the Traumatic Brain Injury claims being asserted by Plaintiff VICTORIANO RAMOS.

20

Plaintiffs’ Counsel are providing those Authorizations on May 5, 2022.

21

Contemporaneously, with this stipulation the Parties are presenting a separate stipulation

22

to allow Dr. Thomas Kinsora, the Neuropsychologist retained by Defendants, to conduct a Rule

23

35 Examination of Plaintiff VICTORIANO RAMOS including an interview and testing.

24

Pending the approval of the Court this examination is tentatively scheduled for June 19, 2022.

25

Dr. Kinsora will travel to California to conduct this examination in order to make Plaintiff

26

VICTORIANO RAMOS as comfortable as possible. Following this examination, the parties

27

have scheduled a mediation with Michael Morehead, Esq. at Judicate West on July 27, 2022,

28

also in California to make a good faith effort to resolve this matter.

It was difficult to find a

-3Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al.
Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Third Request)

Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 27 Filed 05/05/22 Page 4 of 6
29
05/09/22
5

1

mediation date due to the large amount of cases seeking a mediator at this time due to COVID

2

backlog and many cases finally being set for trials this summer and fall.
The Parties believe good cause exists to allow for a 120-day extension of the current

3
4

deadlines to allow for the proposed Rule 35 Examination, the gathering of the necessary medical

5

records and films and for the parties to participate in the mediation on July 27, 2022 in Los

6

Angeles, California in an attempt to resolve this matter. The Parties seek this extension in good

7

faith and not for the purpose of delay.

8

V.

PROPOSED REVISED DISCOVERY SCHEDULE
CURRENT DEADLINE

9

PROPOSED DEADLINE

10

Amend Pleadings

Closed

Closed

11

Expert Disclosures

May 31, 2022

September 28, 2022

12

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures

July 5, 2022

November 2, 2022

13

Discovery Cut-Off

August 1, 2022

November 29, 2022

14

Dispositive Motions

August 29, 2022

December 27, 2022

15

Pretrial Order

September 28, 2022

January 26, 2023

16
17

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-4Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al.
Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Third Request)

Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 27 Filed 05/05/22 Page 5 of 6
29
05/09/22
5

1

DATED this 5th day of May 2022.

DATED this 5th day of May 2022.

2

DORDICK LAW CORPORATION

LAW OFFICE OF PETER GOLDSTEIN

3

/s/ Gary Dordick, Esq.

/s/ Peter Goldstein, Esq.

Elizbeth A. Hernandez, Esq. (Pro Hac Vice)
California Bar No. 204322
Gary A. Dordick, Esq. (Pro Hac Vice)
California Bar No. 128008
509 South Beverly Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA
RAMOS

Peter Goldstein, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 6992
10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Attorney for Plaintiffs
VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA
RAMOS

4
5
6
7
8
9

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that ECF No. 27 is
DENIED as duplicative of ECF No. 26.
It appears the parties accidentally filed
the same stipulation to extend
discovery twice, as opposed to filing a
stipulation for a Rule 35 exam.

10
11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED

15

DATED: 9:46 am, May 09, 2022

16
17
18

BRENDA WEKSLER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DATED this 5th day of May 2022.

19

THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK
BALKENBUSH & EISINGER

20

/s/ Michael C. Hetey, Esq.

21

Michael C. Hetey, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 5668
Harold J. Rosenthal, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 10208
1100 E. Bridger Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89125-2070
Attorneys for Defendants
GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.;
GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.;
and GILTNER, INC

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-5Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al.
Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Third Request)