Nguyen et al v. Pacific Life Insurance Company

Filing 16

ORDER Granting 15 Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. Discovery due by 10/10/2022. Motions due by 11/9/2022. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 12/9/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 5/10/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LOE)

Download PDF
Case 2:22-cv-00449-ART-DJA Document 16 Filed 05/10/22 Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 Vernon E. Leverty, Esq., NV Bar No. 1266 Patrick R. Leverty, Esq., NV Bar No. 8840 LEVERTY & ASSOCIATES LAW CHTD. 832 Willow Street, Reno, NV 89502 Ph. (775) 322-6636 Fax: (7775) 322-3953 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 9 10 DON NGUYEN an individual, EVAN NGUYEN, an individual, MATHEW NGUYEN, an individual; 11 v. 12 13 14 15 Plaintiffs, PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Nebraska Corporation; DOES I-XXX; and ABC CORPORATIONS A-Z; inclusive, Defendants. 16 17 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:22-cv-00449-ART-DJA AMENDED STIPULATED DISCOVERY PLAN & SCHEDULING ORDER – SPECIAL SCHEDULING REVIEW REQUESTED Plaintiffs, DON NGUYEN, EVAN NGUYEN, and MATHEW NGUYEN, by and 18 through their attorneys of record, LEVERTY & ASSOCIATES LAW CHTD., and Defendant 19 PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, by and through its attorneys of record, Cozen 20 O’Conner, hereby submit the following Amended Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. 21 A. 22 INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs brought this action against Defendant alleging breach of the insurance 23 contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and breach of Nevada’s Unfair 24 Trade Practices. 25 B. 26 EARLY CASE CONFERENCE DATE AND WHO ATTENDED The Early Case Conference was held on Wednesday, April 13, 2022. The conference 27 was attended by Patrick R. Leverty, Esq. for Plaintiffs and Karl Riley, Esq. and Laura M. 28 Zulick, Esq. for Defendant. -1- Case 2:22-cv-00449-ART-DJA Document 16 Filed 05/10/22 Page 2 of 5 1 C. 2 SUBJECTS UPON WHICH DISCOVERY IS NEEDED Discovery is required concerning all of Plaintiff’s allegations, as well as Defendants’ 3 affirmative defenses. This is expected to include written discovery, depositions of the parties, 4 depositions of percipient witnesses, depositions of employees, and retention, disclosure, and 5 depositions of expert witnesses. Neither party waives any objections to specific discovery by 6 submitting this proposed scheduling order. 7 D. ISSUES ABOUT DISCLOSURE OR DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY 8 STORED INFORMATION 9 None currently. The parties agreed that if electronically stored information is sought or 10 becomes an issue the parties will meet and confer to try to resolve all issues without the need 11 for Court intervention. 12 E. ISSUES ABOUT CLAIMS OF PRIVILEGE OR PRODUCTION OF 13 PROTECTED INFORMATION 14 Defendant contends that certain of their documents may contain confidential 15 information. Defendant may seek entry of a stipulated order concerning the confidentiality of 16 discovery material. If necessary, Defendant will draft a stipulated protective order for 17 Plaintiff’s review, and parties will submit the proposed order to the Court for review and 18 approval. 19 F. STATEMENT OF REASONS WHY LONGER TIME PERIODS SHOULD 20 APPLY TO THIS CASE 21 At the joint case conference, the parties agreed good cause exists for the calculation of 22 deadlines to begin from the date of the Fed. R. Civ. Pro. Rule 26(f) conference. Defendant 23 Pacific Life filed an answer to the complaint on March 21, 2022. Given counsels’ respective 24 schedules, an early case conference was not held until Wednesday, April 13, 2022. The parties 25 believe the calculation of deadlines from the date the defendant answered, as proscribed by LR 26 26(e)(1), is unworkable because the parties would lose 23 days of discovery. In addition, 27 Defendant Pacific Life identified four corporate representatives. Each of the four corporate 28 representatives reside out of state. In addition, one of the Plaintiffs, Don Nguyen, is an -2- Case 2:22-cv-00449-ART-DJA Document 16 Filed 05/10/22 Page 3 of 5 1 interstate commercial truck driver, which makes scheduling his deposition more difficult than 2 the average witness. Finally, Pacific Life intends to depose the insured’s medical providers, 3 whose demanding schedules can also present scheduling difficulties. Accordingly, the parties 4 request all deadlines at this time be calculated from the date of the Fed. R. Civ. Pro., Rule 26(f) 5 conference. 6 G. 7 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties have discussed alternative dispute resolutions and agree to continue to 8 discuss settlement and explore the possibilities of further alternative dispute resolution as this 9 case proceeds. 10 H. 11 ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF CASE DISPOSITION The parties have discussed the possibility of trial by the Magistrate Judge under 28 12 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 73 and agree that this case is properly suited before the 13 District Court. 14 I. 15 ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE (LR 26-1(b)(9)) A jury trial has been demanded. (See ECF 4). The parties certify they discussed 16 presenting evidence in an electronic format to jurors. The parties agreed that it makes sense 17 during discovery to produce documents in PDF form, which is an electronic format that is 18 compatible with the court’s electronic jury evidence display system. The parties further agreed 19 that prior to trial they will contact the assigned judge’s courtroom administrator for instructions 20 about how to prepare evidence in an electronic format and other requirements for the court’s 21 electronic jury evidence display system. 22 J. THE PARTIES’ PROPOSED DISCOVERY PLAN 23 The parties propose the following timeline: 24 1. Initial Disclosures. The parties both made their initial Federal Rule of Civil 25 Procedure 26 disclosures by Friday, April 29, 2022. This date was within sixteen 26 (16) days from the date of the Fed. R. Civ. Pro., Rule 26(f) conference. 27 28 -3- Case 2:22-cv-00449-ART-DJA Document 16 Filed 05/10/22 Page 4 of 5 1 2. Discovery Cut-off Date. The discovery cut-off will be Monday, October 10, 2 2022. This date is one hundred eighty (180) days from the Fed. R. Civ. Pro., Rule 3 26(f) conference. 4 3. Amending the Pleadings and Adding Parties. Motions to amend the pleadings or 5 add parties (Fed. R. Civ. Pro., Rules 13, 14, 19 and 20) shall be filed at least 6 ninety (90) days before the discovery cut-off date on or before Tuesday, July 12, 7 2022. 8 4. 9 FRCP 26(a)(2) Disclosures (Experts). The Plaintiffs propose that the parties follow the timelines set forth under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 26. 10 a. Initial Disclosures: Expert witness disclosures shall be made no later than 11 sixty (60) days before the discovery cut-off date on or before Thursday, 12 August 11, 2022. 13 b. Rebuttal Disclosures: Disclosures respecting rebuttal experts (if any) shall be 14 made no later than thirty-two (32) days after the initial disclosure of experts 15 on or before Monday, September 12, 2022. 16 5. Dispositive Motions. Dispositive motions shall be filed no later than thirty (30) 17 days after the discovery cut-off date on or before Wednesday, November 9, 18 2022. 19 6. 20 Motions in Limine. Motions in Limine should be submitted thirty (30) days prior to trial, unless otherwise ordered by the Court. 21 7. Pre-Trial Order. The joint pre-trial order shall be filed no later than thirty (30) 22 days after the date set for filing dispositive motions on or before Friday, 23 December 9, 2022. In the event dispositive motions are filed, the date for filing 24 the joint pre-trial order shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision 25 on the dispositive motions or until further order of the Court. 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// -4- Case 2:22-cv-00449-ART-DJA Document 16 Filed 05/10/22 Page 5 of 5 1 8. Extension of Scheduled Deadlines. All motions or stipulations to extend 2 discovery shall be received by the Court within twenty-one (21) days before the 3 discovery cut-off date on or before Monday, September 19, 2022. 4 DATED: This 9th day of May 2022. DATED: This 9th day of May 2022. 5 LEVERTY & ASSOCIATES LAW CHTD. COZEN O’CONNOR 6 _/S/ Patrick Leverty ________ Patrick R. Leverty, Esq. Vernon E. Leverty, Esq. 832 Willow St. Reno, NV 89502 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Don Nguyen, Evan Nguyen and Matthew Nguyen __/S/ Laura Zulick______ Karl Riley, Esq. Laura M. Zulick, Esq. 3753 Howard Hughes Parkway, Ste. 200 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Attorneys for Defendant Pacific Life Insurance Company 7 8 9 10 ORDER 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. ___________________________________ UNITED J. ALBREGTS DANIEL STATES DISTRICT JUDGE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 DATED: ___________________________. DATED: May 10, 2022 15 16 17 18 19 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to FRCP 5(b), I certify I am an employee of the law firm of Leverty & Associates Law Chtd., and that on this date, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document 20 was electronically served through the Court’s electronic filing system (CM/ECF) upon all 21 parties on the master e-file and serve list as follows: 22 25 Karl O. Riley, Esq. COZEN O’ CONNOR 3753 Howard Hughes Parkway, Ste. 200 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Attorneys for Defendant Pacific Life Insurance Company 26 DATED: This 9th day of May2022. 23 24 27 28 Laura M. Zulick COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Mark Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 Attorneys for Defendant Pacific Life Insurance Company /S/ L Jasso ____________________ _ An employee of Leverty & Associates Law Chtd. -5-

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?