Tausinga v. Hankins & Sohn Plastic Surgery Associates et al

Filing 94

ORDER granting 93 Stipulation TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES FOR PHASE I (PRECERTIFICATION) OF DISCOVERY (SECOND REQUEST). Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 3/6/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH)

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

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

Document 93

Page 1 of 7

MARK J. BOURASSA, ESQ. (NBN 7999)
JENNIFER A. FORNETTI, ESQ. (NBN 7644)
VALERIE S. GRAY, ESQ. (NBN 14716)
THE BOURASSA LAW GROUP
2350 W. Charleston Blvd., Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89102
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
NICHOLAS A. COLELLA (pro hac vice)
LYNCH CARPENTER LLP
1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222
Telephone:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
[Additional Counsel in Signature Block]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

18

IN RE HANKINS PLASTIC SURGERY
ASSOCIATES, P. C. dba HANKINS & SOHN
PLASTIC SURGERY ASSOCIATES

19

This Document Relates to: All Actions

17

Filed 03/05/25

Case No.: 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

20

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER
DEADLINES FOR PHASE I (PRECERTIFICATION) OF DISCOVERY

21

(SECOND REQUEST)

22
23

Defendant Hankins & Sohn Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. dba Hankins & Sohn Plastic

24

Surgery Associates (“Defendant”) by and through its counsel of record, SCHNITZER JOHNSON

25

& WATSON, CHTD., Plaintiffs Jennifer Tausinga, Alysia Wrenn, and Caroline Aurora

26

(collectively “Plaintiffs”) on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated, by and through

27

co-interim counsel of record, Jennifer A. Fornetti of The Bourassa Law Group and Nicholas A.

28

Colella of Lynch Carpenter LLP and Plaintiffs’ steering committee, Raina Borrelli of Strauss

-1-

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

Document 93

Filed 03/05/25

Page 2 of 7

1

Borrelli PLLC, Ramzy Ladah of Ladah Law Firm, and additional Plaintiffs’ counsel Clark

2

Seegmiller and Jonathan B. Lee of Richard Harris Law Firm, hereby stipulate to continue the

3

discovery deadlines and submit their Stipulation and Order to Modify the Scheduling Order

4

Deadlines for Phase I (Pre-Certification) of Discovery pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, as follows:

5

I.

DISCOVERY COMPLETED AND ONGOING

6

1.

On January 16, 2024, Plaintiffs, Jennifer Tausinga, Alysia Wrenn, and Olga

7

Romashova served their Initial Disclosure of Documents and Witnesses Pursuant to FRCP

8

26(a)(1).

9

2.

On January 16, 2024, Plaintiffs, Jennifer Tausinga, Alysia Wrenn, and Olga

10

Romashova served their First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Production of

11

Documents and Things, and First Request for Admissions to Defendant. Defendant served its

12

responses to this propounded discovery on March 12, 2024. Defendant subsequently served its

13

supplemental responses to Plaintiffs’ First Request for Admissions on November 5, 2024.

14

3.

After the Court heard Defendant’s Motion to Stay Discovery or Alternatively, to

15

Bifurcate Discovery on April 9, 2024, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served

16

its Initial FRCP 26 List of Witnesses and Production of Documents on April 29, 2024.

17

4.

On July 12, 2024, Plaintiffs, Jennifer Tausinga, Alysia Wrenn, and Olga

18

Romashova served their Second Set of Interrogatories and Second Set of Requests for Production

19

of Documents and Things to Defendant. Defendant responded to this propounded discovery on

20

August 26, 2024, and supplemented its responses on October 5, 2024.

21

5.

On July 29, 2024, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served its

22

First Supplemental List of Witnesses and Production of Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26 List of

23

Witnesses and Production of Documents.

24

6.

On October 10, 2024, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served

25

its Second Supplemental List of Witnesses and Production of Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26

26

List of Witnesses and Production of Documents.

27
28

-2-

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

1

7.

Document 93

Filed 03/05/25

Page 3 of 7

On November 5, 2024, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served

2

its Third Supplemental List of Witnesses and Production of Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26 List

3

of Witnesses and Production of Documents.

4

8.

On November 15, 2024, McBride Hall filed their Notice of Association of Counsel.

5

9.

On January 7, 2025, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served its

6

First Supplemental Responses to Plaintiffs’ First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for

7

Production of Documents and its Second Supplemental Responses to Plaintiffs’ Second Set of

8

Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents.

9

10.

On January 7, 2025, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served its

10

Fourth Supplemental List of Witnesses and Production of Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26 List

11

of Witnesses and Production of Documents.

12

11.

On January 17, 2025, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served

13

its First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs will respond to these interrogatories on March

14

4, 2025.

15

12.

On January 25, 2025, Plaintiffs served a subpoena on Amon Ra Network

16

Consulting. After attempting to meet and confer on the scope of the subpoenas pursuant to this

17

Court’s Order, Defendant filed its Motion for Protective Order on February 6, 2025. The Court is

18

set to hear Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order on March 18, 2025. Amon Ra produced

19

documents on February 25, 2025, and Plaintiffs are continuing to meet and confer with Amon Ra

20

regarding its production.

21

13.

On January 26, 2025, Plaintiffs served a subpoena on I.T. Decisions. After

22

attempting to meet and confer on the scope of the subpoenas pursuant to this Court’s Order,

23

Defendant filed its Motion for Protective Order on February 6, 2025. The Court is set to hear

24

Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order on March 18, 2025.

25

responding and Plaintiffs are continuing their efforts to enforce the subpoena.

26

14.

I.T. Decisions objected to

On February 6, 2025, Plaintiffs served a Notice for a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition on

27

Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. The parties are continuing to meet and confer

28

on the topics and scheduling.

-3-

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

1

15.

Document 93

Filed 03/05/25

Page 4 of 7

On February 12, 2025, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served

2

its First Set of Requests for Admission and Requests for Production of Documents on Plaintiffs.

3

Plaintiffs will respond to these requests on March 14, 2025.

4

16.

On February 24, 2025, Defendant Hankins Plastic Surgery Associates, P.C. served

5

its Fifth Supplemental List of Witnesses and Production of Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26 List

6

of Witnesses and Production of Documents.

7

17.

On January 23, 2025, Plaintiffs provided notice to Defendant that they intended to

8

serve a subpoena on Patient Now. After attempting to meet and confer on the scope of the

9

subpoenas pursuant to this Court’s Order, Defendant filed its Motion for Protective Order on

10

February 6, 2025. Plaintiffs successfully served their subpoena on Patient Now on February 26,

11

2025. The Court is set to hear Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order on March 18, 2025.

12
13
14
15

18.

The parties are continuing to meet and confer on Defendant’s discovery responses

and production of documents in the hopes of avoiding Court intervention.
II.

PENDING MOTIONS AND DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE
COMPLETED

16

On December 23, 2024, this Court granted Plaintiffs leave to file their Second Amended

17

Complaint. Dkt. 74. On December 30, 2024, Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint.

18

Dkt. 75. On January 13, 2025, Defendant moved to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. Dkt.

19

76. Plaintiffs opposed that motion on January 24, 2025, Dkt. 77, and Defendant filed a reply, Dkt.

20

78. That motion remains pending.

21

On February 6, 2025, Defendant filed a motion for a protective order regarding the three

22

subpoenas Plaintiffs served on third parties. Dkt. 79. At its heart, this motion concerns the proper

23

scope of Phase I discovery set out in the initial Scheduling Order, Dkt. 48, which the parties have

24

differing interpretations of.

25

Due to the pending motion to dismiss and the pending motion regarding the subpoenas and

26

scope of discovery, the parties request that discovery be continued to allow all the parties to

27

continue to conduct Phase I discovery focused on information necessary for Plaintiffs’ motion for

28

class certification, including the “commonality, predominance, and typicality as it relates to

-4-

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

Document 93

Filed 03/05/25

Page 5 of 7

1

Plaintiffs and [the] putative class members.” “[W]hile discovery of certification issues during

2

Phase I may overlap with issues related to the merits in Phase II, the parties agreed to limit their

3

discovery in each Phase to the particular aims and subject matter of each respective Phase.” ECF

4

No. 48 at 4-5 (citing Tyus v. Wendy's of Las Vegas, Inc. , No. 214CV00729GMNVCF, 2017 WL

5

3026403, at *5 (D. Nev. July 17, 2017)). To that end, the Parties intend to conduct additional

6

written discovery, request and produce documents, and depositions.

7

As a result of these depositions, written responses, and document production, the parties

8

may decide to retain experts, which will result in the need for the experts to create reports and

9

potentially be deposed. Pursuant to Local Rule 1-1, the parties desire to do so in a cost-efficient

10

manner and with the Court’s goal of limiting and phasing discovery.

11

III.

REASONS WHY THE REMAINING DISCOVERY CANNOT BE

12

COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT OF THE EXISTING

13

DEADLINE

14

Due to the pending motion to dismiss and the parties’ fundamental disagreement as to the

15

appropriate scope of Phase I discovery which is also currently pending before the Court, the parties

16

have been unable to complete discovery within the existing timeline. Additionally, Plaintiffs’

17

Second Amended Complaint added another Plaintiff, Sarah Jefferson, and new counsel was

18

associated to represent Hankins & Sohn in this case from McBride Hall, see Dkt. 73.

19

As a result, the parties intend to conduct discovery in an efficient manner across the five

20

(5) other lawsuits filed against Hankins & Sohn to the fullest extent possible. As the motion to

21

dismiss and motion for a protective order are pending before the Court, the parties have shown

22

good cause and excusable neglect with this request pursuant to LR 26-3. See Bateman v. U.S.

23

Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir. 2000).

24

IV.

25

Based on the foregoing, the parties hereby stipulate and agree that an additional 90 days

26

are needed to complete Phase I discovery, and thus request that the following scheduling deadlines

27

be substituted for the deadlines contained in the Amended Scheduling Order:

PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF PHASE I DISCOVERY

28

-5-

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

Document 93

1

Event

2

Interim Fact Discovery Cut-Off Date
Close of Class Certification Expert Discovery
Phase I (Pre-Certification) Discovery Cut-Off Date
Amending Pleadings and Adding Parties

3
4
5

9
10

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

7
8

Page 6 of 7

Date

Initial Class Certification Expert Designations
Rebuttal Class Certification Expert Designations
Motion for Class Certification
Motions to Exclude Certification Experts
Deadline to Participate in Mediation
Joint Proposed Discovery Plan Regarding PostCertification Phase

6

Filed 03/05/25

June 12, 2025
July 16, 2025
October 14, 2025
June 12, 2025
July 16, 2025
August 14, 2025
October 14, 2025
November 17, 2025
November 24, 2025
Within 30 days of the Decision on
Motion for Class Certification

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Dated: March 5, 2025

Dated: March 5, 2025

/s/ Brittany Resch
Raina C. Borrelli (pro hac vice)
Brittany Resch (pro hac vice)
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

/s/ Renee Green
L. Renee Green, Esq. (NBN 12755)
Gary E. Schnitzer, Esq. (NBN 395)
SCHNITZER JOHNSON & WATSON, CTD
8985 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. 200
Las Vegas, NV 89123

Mark J. Bourassa, Esq. (NBN 7999)
Jennifer A. Fornetti, Esq. (NBN 7644)
Valerie S. Gray, Esq. (NBN 14716)
THE BOURASSA LAW GROUP
2350 W Charleston Blvd, Suite 100
Las Vegas, Nevada 89102
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Robert C. Mcbride, Esq. (NBN 7082)
Chelsea R. Hueth, Esq. (NBN 10904)
8329 W. Sunset Road, Suite 260
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113
Attorneys for Defendant

26
27
28

-6-

Case 2:23-cv-00824-RFB-DJA

1

3

/s/ Nicholas A. Colella
Nicholas A. Colella (pro hac vice)
1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222

4

Attorneys for Plaintiff Tausinga

2

Document 93

Filed 03/05/25

Page 7 of 7

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

/s/ Daniel C. Tetreault
Daniel C. Tetreault, Esq. (NBN 11473)
Ramzy P. Ladah (NBN 11405)
517 S. Third Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Attorneys for Plaintiff Wrenn

14

/s/ Jonathan Lee
Jonathan B. Lee, Esq. (NBN 13524)
Clark Seegmiller, Esq. (NBN 3873)
801 South Fourth Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101

15

Attorneys for Plaintiff Caroline Aurora

12
13

16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED:

20
21
22

3/6/2025
Dated

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28

-7-