Filed: Aug. 19, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 19, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), by and through its attorney of record, Chelsea A. Crowton, Esq. of the law firm of Wright, Finlay & Zak, LLP, and Defendant, Gary Thompson (hereinafter "Thompson), by and through its attorney of record, Bryan Naddafi, Esq. of the Law Offices of P. Sterling Kerr, hereby submit this Stipulation for Extension of Time to Conduct Discovery in ac
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), by and through its attorney of record, Chelsea A. Crowton, Esq. of the law firm of Wright, Finlay & Zak, LLP, and Defendant, Gary Thompson (hereinafter "Thompson), by and through its attorney of record, Bryan Naddafi, Esq. of the Law Offices of P. Sterling Kerr, hereby submit this Stipulation for Extension of Time to Conduct Discovery in acc..
More
STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), by and through its attorney of record, Chelsea A. Crowton, Esq. of the law firm of Wright, Finlay & Zak, LLP, and Defendant, Gary Thompson (hereinafter "Thompson), by and through its attorney of record, Bryan Naddafi, Esq. of the Law Offices of P. Sterling Kerr, hereby submit this Stipulation for Extension of Time to Conduct Discovery in accordance with LR 6-1 and LR 26-4.
1. The parties seek an extension of the discovery cut-off deadline. The current discovery deadline is August 31, 2016. The parties agree to extend the discovery cut-off deadline to November 30, 2016 or to the closest judicial deadline date available.
2. Nature of the Case
This action relates to residential real property located in Henderson, Nevada. The Complaint seeks a judicial determination that the HOA Sale did not extinguished Nationstar's Deed of Trust.
3. Completed Discovery.
a) Plaintiff has served its 26(a) Initial Disclosures.
b) Plaintiff has served written discovery to Thompson.
c) Plaintiff has served a subpoena to HOA Trustee and has received the subpoenaed documents.
d) Plaintiff has served written discovery to HOA and has received the subpoenaed documents.
e) Plaintiff has scheduled the deposition of Thompson.
f) Plaintiff has attempted to schedule the deposition of Katherine Murphy, the bidder at the HOA Sale.
g) Plaintiff has scheduled the deposition of the HOA Trustee.
4. Discovery that remains to be completed.
a) Deposition of Thompson.
b) Deposition of HOA Trustee.
c) Deposition of Katherine Murphy.
5. Reason(s) why the deadline was not satisfied or the remaining discovery was not timely completed
a) On August 8, 2016, Plaintiff contacted Opposing Counsel regarding an inquiry into the availability of dates before August 31, 2016 to conduct the deposition of Thompson. Counsel for Plaintiff never received a response to the e-mail.
b) After service of the Notice of Deposition of Thompson, on August 15, 2016 Counsel for Thompson contacted my office to state that Thompson lives in Colorado and would only be in Las Vegas between September 1-6.
c) On August 9, 2016, Counsel for Plaintiff e-mailed Katherine Murphy regarding an inquiry into the availability of dates before August 31, 2016 to conduct the deposition of Murphy.
d) On August 11, 2016, Katherine Murphy e-mailed Counsel for Plaintiff and stated that she is in Boston for a medical procedure and will only be back in Las Vegas after August 30, 2016 for three days before traveling the month of September.
6. Proposed schedule for completing remaining discovery.
1) Discovery Cut-Off: November 30, 2016
2) Dispositive motions: December 30, 2016
3) Pretrial order: January 30, 2017
In the event dispositive motions are filed, the date for filing the joint pretrial order shall be suspended until 30 days after decision of the dispositive motions or further order of the Court.
This is the parties' first request for extension of these deadlines and is not intended to cause any delay or prejudice to any party.
IT IS ORDERED that the district judge has entered a stay (ECF No. 24), and as such, the Stipulation is DENIED without prejudice.
