Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Falls v. Desert Palace, Inc, 2:17-cv-00019-GMN-PAL. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180105a59 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR AN ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE A REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SEVER PLAINTIFF WILLIAM J. BERRY, JR. [ECF NO. 29] (First Request) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . TO: THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD. Plaintiffs WILLIAM J. BERRY, JR., CYNTHIA FALLS, and SHANE KAUFMANN and Defendant DESERT PALACE, INC., D/B/A CAESARS PALACE, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby agree to extend the time for
More

STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR AN ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE A REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SEVER PLAINTIFF WILLIAM J. BERRY, JR. [ECF NO. 29]

(First Request)

TO: THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD.

Plaintiffs WILLIAM J. BERRY, JR., CYNTHIA FALLS, and SHANE KAUFMANN and Defendant DESERT PALACE, INC., D/B/A CAESARS PALACE, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby agree to extend the time for defendant to file its reply in support of defendant's motion to sever the claims of plaintiff William J. Berry, Jr. [ECF No. 29] filed on September 15, 2017. Plaintiffs filed their response to defendant's motion on December 27, 2017, after several extensions were granted and the litigation was stayed pending the outcome of the parties' (unsuccessful) December 13, 2017 mediation. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Court's local rules, Defendant's reply is currently due January 3, 2018. However, the parties agreed to a reply deadline of January 10, 2018 in the their Second Joint Status Report [ECF No. 49] and Proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order [ECF No. 52], currently pending before the Court. This extension is requested by defense counsel because the parties' proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order has not yet been approved by the Court, defendant needs additional time to prepare its reply due to the intervening holiday, and plaintiffs' counsel agreed to the extension as a professional courtesy. An extension until January 10, 2018, will not unduly delay this matter in any way.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer