Martin v. Albertson's LLC

Filing 26

ORDER Granting 25 Joint Pretrial Order. Calendar Call set for 1/26/2026 at 01:30 PM in LV Courtroom 6D before Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey. Jury Trial set for 2/10/2026 at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 6D before Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey. See order for further details. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 3/6/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AMMi)

1
2
3
4
5
6

AUSTIN R. WOOD, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No.: 16026
RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM
801 South Fourth Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

7

UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

DISTRICT OF NEVADA
KATHLEEN MARTIN, individually;
vs.

Case No.: 2:24-cv-00973-JAD-NJK
JOINT PRE-TRIAL ORDER

Plaintiff,

ALBERTSON’S LLC, a Foreign LimitedLiability Company; DOES I through XX; and
ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES I through XX,
inclusive,
Defendants.
After pretrial proceedings in this case,
IT IS ORDERED:

I.

INTRODUCTION

This is a slip and fall case that occurred on or about December 26, 2022, at an Albertsons
located at 2910 Bicentennial Parkway, Henderson, Nevada 89044.
Plaintiff alleged Defendant as the owners, maintainers, operators, and/or controllers of the
property owed Plaintiff a duty of care to provide a safe environment for Plaintiff, a duty of care to
adequately maintain and inspect the property, and a duty of care to warn Plaintiff of any non-obvious
and dangerous conditions. Plaintiff alleges Defendant breached that duty because Defendant knew,
reasonably should have known, and/or caused a dangerous condition to exist at the Property and
failed to warn or otherwise make safe the dangerous condition. Lastly, Plaintiff alleges that as a

Page 1 of 13

1

direct and proximate result of these failures, Plaintiff slipped and fell and sustained injuries which

2

required medical treatment and caused her significant pain and suffering.

3

Defendant denies the claims of (1) negligence/premise liability and demands strict proof of

4

the damages alleged by Plaintiff, if any. Defendant further asserts that Plaintiff was guilty of

5

negligence on her own part which caused or contributed to any injuries suffered by her, and that the

6

negligence of Plaintiff exceeds that of Defendant, if any, and that Plaintiff is thereby barred from

7

any recovery.

8

Defendant has offered additional affirmative defenses as part of its pleadings in this action,

9

and Defendant reserves the right to rely on the pleadings on file in this action to articulate its

10

contentions in this case.
II.

11

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

12

This action was originated by the filing of a Complaint in the District Court, Clark County,

13

Nevada on April 8, 2024. Defendant Answered on April 29, 2024, and removed the case from State

14

Court to Federal Court on May 24, 2024, citing diversity between the parties and that this Court has

15

jurisdiction of the matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 28 U.S.C § 1446(d).

16

III.

THE FOLLOWING FACTS ARE ADMITTED BY THE PARTIES AND REQUIRE
NO PROOF

17
18

1. Venue is proper.

19

2. This lawsuit arises out of an incident that occurred on December 26, 2024.

20

IV.

THE FOLLOWING FACTS, ALTHOUGH NOT ADMITTED, WILL NOT BE
CONTESTED AT TRIAL BY EVIDENCE OF THE CONTRARY

21
22

1. None.

23

V.

24

THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF FACT TO BE TRIED AND DETERMINED AT
TRIAL

25

1. Whether Defendant owed a duty of care to Plaintiff and, if so, what duty of care.

26

2. Whether Defendant breached a duty of care owed to Plaintiff.

27

3. Whether such breach was a proximate cause of the incident and, if any, what percentage.

28

Page 2 of 13

1
2
3
4
5
6

4. Whether Plaintiff exercised ordinary care, caution or prudence for the protection of herself
and, as such, whether Plaintiff was comparatively negligent.
5. Whether Plaintiff’s negligence, if any, was a proximate cause of the incident and, if any,
what percentage.
6. Whether Plaintiff expressly assumed whatever risk or hazard existed at the time of the
incident.

7

7. Whether the risk or hazard were open, obvious, and known to Plaintiff.

8

8. Whether the damages sustained by Plaintiff were caused by the acts of third persons who

9

were not agents, servants, or employees of Defendant and who were not acting on behalf of

10

Defendant in any manner or form.

11
12

9. Whether Plaintiff suffered injuries as alleged, and whether those injuries were proximately
caused by the incident.

13

10. Whether Plaintiff failed to mitigate he complained of injuries and resulting damages.

14

11. The nature, extent, and value of Plaintiff’s incident related damages.

15

VI.

THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF LAW TO BE DETERMINED AT TRIAL

16

1. Whether Plaintiff’s Complaint is bared by an applicable statute of limitations.

17

2. Whether Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendant upon which relief

18

can be granted.

19

3. The issues of law raised in the parties’ anticipated Motions in Limine.

20

4. The issues of law raised by the parties at trial.
VII.

21
22

1. The following exhibits are stipulated into evidence in this case and may be so marked by

23

the clerk:

24

None.

25

EXHIBITS

2. The following exhibits though not agreed as admissible evidence in this case, are subject to

26

use by the parties. The parties will work to refine the list of exhibits as motions and

27

evidentiary decisions are decided by the Court and amongst the parties:

28

Page 3 of 13

Plaintiff’s Proposed Exhibits:

1
2

Exhibit

3

1.

4
5
6
7

2.
3.

Description
Plaintiff’s Complaint (Bates stamped ALB000001-8)
Defendant’s Answer (Bates stamped ALB00000914)
Photographs of Plaintiff at the scene of the incident
(SOI 0001 – SOI 0010)

8

4.

Photographs of Plaintiff’s shoes (PPS 0001)

9

5.

Sweep Log Report (ALB 000015-17)

10

6.

Photographs taken by Albertsons (ALB000018-21)

11

7.

Surveillance Video of the Incident

12

8.

Incident Detail Report (ALB000084-88)

13
14

9.

15
16

10.

17
18

11.

12.

22

13.

24
25
26

SimonMed Imaging medical records and billing
statement (SMI 0001 – SMI 0004)
records and billing statement (AOSM 0001 – AOSM
0025)

20

23

0002)

Advanced Orthopedic and Sports Medicine medical

19

21

Desert Radiology billing statement (DR 0001 – DR

14.

Valley Hospital Medical Center medical records and
billing statement (VHMC 0001 – VHMC 0149)
US Anesthesia Partners of Nevada billing statement
(USAP 0001)
Select Physical Therapy medical records and billing
statement (SPT 0001 – SPT 0033)

27
28

Page 4 of 13

Defendant’s Objection

1
2

Collective Union Health Windmill Lane a/k/a
15.

Everside Health medical records (CUH 0001 – CUH

3
4
5

0179)
CC Cleaning Policies and Procedures (ALB000774-

16.

818)

6

17.

Work Orders (ALB000769-773)

7

18.

General Policies and Procedures (ALB000819-957)

8

19.

Loss Run Report (ALB000990-993)

9

20.

Sweep Best Practices (ALB000994)

10
11

KellerMeyer Bergensons Services Agreement (Bates

21.

stamped ALB000958-989)

12
13

Defendant’s Proposed Exhibits

14

Exhibit

15

1.

16
17
18
19

2.

24

27
28

14)

4.

Photographs (Bates stamped ALB000018-21)

5.

Surveillance Video via OneDrive link: Martin v
Albertsons_Surveillance Video
Correspondence from Richard Harris Law Firm to

6.

Albertsons dated January 9, 2023 (Bates stamped
ALB000022-23)

25
26

Defendant’s Answer (Bates stamped ALB000009Sweep Log Report (Bates stamped ALB000015-17)

22
23

Plaintiff’s Complaint (Bates stamped ALB000001-8)

3.

20
21

Description

Correspondence from Richard Harris Law Firm to
7.

Sedgwick dated March 1, 2023 (Bates stamped
ALB000024-25)

Page 5 of 13

Plaintiff’s Objection

1
2

Correspondence from Sedgwick to Richard Harris
8.

Law Firm dated March 9, 2023 (Bates stamped

3

ALB000026-27)

4

Correspondence from Sedgwick to Richard Harris

5

9.

Law Firm dated May 16, 2023 (Bates stamped

6

ALB000028)

7

Chubb Group Excess Commercial General Liability

8

10.

Policy Declarations (Bates stamped ALB000028-34)

9
10
11

Medical and billing records received from Simon
11.

Med Imaging (7 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000035-

12

43)

13

Images received from Simon Med Imaging (1 page)

14

12.

(CD available upon request) (Bates stamped

15

ALB000044)

16

Billing records received from US Anesthesia

17

13.

Partners of Nevada (8 pages) (Bates stamped

18

ALB00045-52)

19

Medical and billing records received from Select

20

14.

21

ALB000053-83)

22
23

15.

24
25
26

Physical Therapy (31 pages) (Bates stamped
Incident Detail Report (Bates stamped ALB00008488)
Medical and billing records received from Advanced

16.

Orthopedic & Sports Medicine (28 pages) (Bates
stamped ALB000089-116)

27
28

Page 6 of 13

1
2

Medical and billing records received from Desert
17.

Radiology (27 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000117-

3

143)

4

Certificate of No Records Found received from

5

18.

Shadow Emergency Physicians (6 pages) (Bates

6

stamped ALB000144-149)

7

Medical and Images received from Desert Radiology

8

19.

(1 page) (Images available upon request) (Bates

9

stamped ALB000150)

10

Medical and billing records received from VHS -

11

20.

Valley Hospital (312 pages) (Bates stamped

12

ALB000151-462)

13

Medical and billing records received from Active

14

21.

15
16
17
18

768)
22.
23.

19
20

24.

21
22

Healthcare (306 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000463-

25.

Work Orders (Bates stamped ALB000769-773)
CC Cleaning Policies and Procedures (Bates stamped
ALB000774-818)
General Policies and Procedures (Bates stamped
ALB000819-957)
KellerMeyer Bergensons Services Agreement (Bates
stamped ALB000958-989)

23

26.

Loss Run Report (Bates stamped ALB000990-993)

24

27.

Sweep Best Practices (Bates stamped ALB000994)

28.

ISO Report (Bates stamped ALB000995-1013)

25
26
27
28

The parties reserve the right to use any discovery responses and/or deposition testimony
and/or deposition exhibits for impeachment and/or substantively as party admissions, as may be
Page 7 of 13

1

relevant at trial. The parties reserve the right to use demonstrative evidence. The parties also reserves

2

the right to use any exhibit listed or introduced by the opposing party, or as previously produced by

3

the parties. The parties also reserve the right to amend the proposed exhibits and objections at any

4

time prior to the start of trial in this matter.

5

The parties reserve any and all evidentiary objections for trial. The parties reserve the right

6

to object to the admissibility of trial exhibits on the basis of foundation, authenticity, hearsay, and

7

relevance. The parties further reserve the right to object to any exhibit being offered by each side

8

which has not been previously produced during the normal course of discovery proceedings, or

9

pursuant to stipulation and agreement of the parties. The parties also reserve any and all evidentiary

10

objections for trial.

11

Electronic Evidence: The parties intend to offer and present evidence in electronic format

12

to jurors for the purpose of jury deliberations pursuant to Local Rule 16-3(b)(9) and will contact the

13

Court Administrator for instructions how to prepare evidence in electronic format and for any other

14

requirements set by the Court.

15

Depositions: The parties at this time do not intend to offer page and line designations for

16

any deposition transcripts. In the event that the parties learn that a witness is unavailable to testify

17

at trial, the respective party will notify all parties and the Court of page and line designations of the

18

unavailable witness’s deposition transcript to offer at trial. Defendant reserves the right to use all

19

depositions which have been conducted in this action to refresh recollection and/or to impeach a

20

witness, and otherwise use at trial in accordance with the applicable rules, i.e., Fed. R. Civ. P. 32;

21

Fed. R. Evid. 801(d).

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

VIII. FACT & PERCIPIENT WITNESSES
Plaintiff’s Proposed Witnesses
1. Kathleen Martin
c/o Richard Harris Law Firm
801 South 4th Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Phone: [phone]
2. Scott Martin
2043 Colvin Run Drive
Page 8 of 13

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

Henderson, Nevada 89052
3. Jaime Franco, Employee of Albertson
c/o BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM
139 East Warm Springs Road
Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
Phone: [phone]
4. Kenny Benedict, 30(b)(6) Designee
c/o BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM
139 East Warm Springs Road
Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
Phone: [phone]
5. Anebe Pretorius, 30(b)(6) Designee
c/o BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM
139 East Warm Springs Road
Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
Phone: [phone]

15

6. X. Nick Liu, D.O.
Advanced Orthopedic & Sports Medicine
7195 Advanced Way
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113

16

Defendant’s Proposed Witnesses:

14

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

1.

Plaintiff, KATHLEEN MARTIN, c/o Austin R. Wood, Esq. of Richard Harris Law

Firm, 801 South Fourth Street, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101. This witness is expected to testify
regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s Complaint.
2.

Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s 30(b)(6) witness, c/o Lew Brandon, Jr., Esq.,

Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm Springs
Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and
circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s Complaint.
3.

Jaime Franco, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon, Jr.,

Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm

28

Page 9 of 13

1

Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and

2

circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s Complaint.

3
4
5

4.

Kenny Benedict, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon,

Jr., Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm

6

Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and

7

circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s Complaint.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

5.

Alexander Serrano, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon,

Jr., Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm
Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and
circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s Complaint.
6.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Simon Med Imaging,

6900 E Camelback Rd, Ste. 700, Scottsdale, AZ 85251. This witness is expected to testify regarding
the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment,
prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
7.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for US Anesthesia

Partners of Nevada 7160 Rafael Rivera Way, Ste 210 Las Vegas, NV 89113. This witness is
expected to testify regarding the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained
concerning the treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
8.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Select Physical

Therapy 680 American Ave, 2nd Floor King of Prussia, PA 19406. This witness is expected to testify
regarding the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the
treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.

28

Page 10 of 13

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

9.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Advanced Orthopedic

& Sports Medicine 7195 Advanced Way Las Vegas, NV 89113. This witness is expected to testify
regarding the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the
treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
10.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Desert Radiology 2020

Palomino Ln, Ste 100 Las Vegas, NV 89106. This witness is expected to testify regarding the
completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, prognostics
and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
11.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Shadow Emergency

12

Physicians 620 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, NV 89106. This witness is expected to testify regarding

13

the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment,

14
15
16

prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
12.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for VHS-Valley Hospital

17

620 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, NV 89106. This witness is expected to testify regarding the

18

completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, prognostics

19

and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.

20
21
22

13.

Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Active Healthcare 911

North Buffalo Drive, Ste 113 Las Vegas, NV 89128. This witness is expected to testify regarding

23

the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment,

24

prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.

25
26
27

14.

Anebe Pretorius, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon,

Jr., Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm

28

Page 11 of 13

1

Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and

2

circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s Complaint.

3
4
5
6
7

The parties agree that the witness and exhibit list may be amended as required before trial.
The parties reserve the right to use any witnesses listed by any other party to this litigation. The
parties further reserve the right to name and list any witnesses deemed necessary for rebuttal
and/or impeachment purposes.
IX.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

TRIAL DATE

Counsel have met and conferred and submit a list of three (3) agreed-upon start dates for
trial:
February 9, 2026
February 16, 2026
February 23, 2026
It is expressly understood by the undersigned that the Court will set a trial of this matter on
one of the agreed-upon dates if possible; if not, the trial will be set at the convenience of the Court’s
calendar.
X.

ESTIMATED LENGTH OF TRIAL

It is estimated that the trial will take a total of 7-10 days.
DATED on this 5th day of March, 2025.

DATED on this 5th day of March, 2025.

RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM

BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM

_/s/ Austin Wood
Austin R. Wood, Esq.
Nevada Bar No.: 16026
801 South Fourth Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Attorneys for Plaintiff

_/s/ Kristen Molloy
Lew Brandon, Jr., Esq.
Nevada Bar No.: 5880
Ryan Venci, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 7547
Kristen Molloy, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 14927
139 E. Warm Springs Road
Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
Attorney for Defendant

28

Page 12 of 13

1
2
3
4
5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Trial date. This case is set down for a JURY trial on the Tuesday, February 10, 2026,
9:00 a.m. two-week trial stack.
2. Calendar call. The parties must appear for Calendar Call on January 26, 2026, at 1:30
p.m.

6

3. Length of trial. Though the parties have indicated that they anticipate this will be a 7 to

7

10- day trial, upon review, the court concludes that this case should take no more than

8

4 full days to try, so the parties should plan and prepare their witness schedules to finish

9

this trial within 4 days, and during voir dire, the court will seek a jury that is time-

10

qualified for 4 days.

11

4. Trial documents must be filed by Calendar Call. No later than noon on the day before

12

the scheduled Calendar Call, each party must file with the Court: (a) the parties’ trial

13

briefs; (b) a list of each party’s witnesses; (c) a stipulated exhibit list, and separate exhibit

14

lists for exhibits that are not stipulated (the parties must meaningfully meet and confer to

15

prepare a stipulated exhibit list before this deadline); (d) jointly proposed jury

16

instructions and separate jury instructions for proposed instructions that are not stipulated

17

to; (e) each party’s proposed voir dire questions.

18

5. Deposition designations due 30 days before trial. Any party who anticipates

19

presenting deposition testimony in lieu of live testimony must file (a) page-and-line

20

designations along with (b) a mini version of each relevant deposition transcript at least

21

30 days before trial; failure to timely file deposition designations will result in the

22

preclusion of the testimony at trial. Objections to such designations must be filed no

23

later than five calendar days after the designations are filed; failure to file timely

24

objections to deposition designations renders those objections waived. Responses to any
1

1

such objections are due three calendar days after the objections are filed. Absent

2

extraordinary circumstances, no extension of these deadlines will be granted with or

3

without a stipulation because rulings on such designations are time-consuming and the

4

court requires sufficient time in advance of trial to make them.

5

6. Motions in limine.

6

a.

MIL deadlines. Motions in limine (MILs) are due December 12, 2025, and

7

responses are due 14 days later. These court-ordered deadlines override any deadline

8

contained in a federal or local rule and will not be extended absent extraordinary

9

circumstances. MIL replies will be allowed only with leave of court, and each side may

10

file only a single request for leave, see L.R. 16-3(a).

11
12
13

b.

Additional MIL requirements. The process for preparing and filing

motions in limine will be governed by the following additional rules and considerations:
i.

Meaningful meet-and-confer required. As Local Rule 16-3 requires,

14

before any motion in limine is filed, the parties must meet and confer (by telephone or in

15

person not merely by email or some other form of writing) about the substance of each

16

contemplated in-limine issue and attempt to reach an agreement on the issue. Evidentiary

17

agreements reached during this process must be memorialized by a written stipulation. If

18

the parties do not reach an agreement on an issue and a motion in limine remains necessary,

19

the motion must be accompanied by a declaration certifying that counsel actually conferred

20

in good faith to resolve the issue before the motion was filed (or re-filed), see L.R. 16-3(a).

21

The failure to include the certificate of counsel will result in the automatic denial of the

22

motion without the opportunity to cure this deficiency.

23
24
2

ii.

1

Only evidentiary issues. Motions in limine must address only true

2

evidentiary issues and not be belated motions for dispositive rulings disguised as a motion

3

in limine.

4

iii.

Omnibus filing. Any party desiring to file motions in limine on

5

multiple issues or requesting multiple rulings must include all in-limine issues in a

6

SINGLE, omnibus motion that numbers each issue consecutively; no party may file

7

multiple, separate motions. This format eliminates the need for redundant recitations of

8

facts and introductory statements of the law. If the size of the omnibus motion exceeds the

9

page limit in the local rule, see L.R. 7-3(b), a separate motion to exceed the page limits

10

should be filed contemporaneously with the omnibus motion; the motion to exceed page

11

limits must not be styled as an “emergency.”

12

iv.

Vague requests prohibited. The parties are cautioned that vague

13

requests based on speculative issues, like requests to generally preclude improper attorney

14

arguments, violations of the golden rule, or irrelevant evidence will be flatly denied. The

15

court intends to follow the rules of evidence and procedure at trial and expects the parties

16

to do the same. Motions seeking little more than an order enforcing a rule waste the court’s

17

time and the parties’ resources. Counsel is strongly cautioned that abuse of the motion-in-

18

limine vehicle in this manner may result in sanctions against the attorneys.

19
20
21

This order will govern the trial of this case and may not be amended except by order of the court.
DATED: 3/6/2025

___________________________________
Jennifer A. Dorsey
United States District Judge

22
23
24
3