Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Teofrio v. Warner, 2:15-cv-01747-JAD-GWF. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180705f58 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 03, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 03, 2018
Summary: ORDER STIPULATION TO EXTEND BRIEFING (Fourth Request) JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Pursuant to Local Rules ("LR") IA 6-1, Defendants, Richard T. Warner, Jr. ("Warner") and Western Express, Inc. ("Western Express"), and Plaintiff, Tracy Nichole Teofrio ("Teofrio"), by and through their respective attorneys, stipulate as follows: 1. On April 13, 2018, Warner and Western Express filed their motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 54]. On May 4, 2018, Teofrio filed her response [ECF N
More

ORDER

STIPULATION TO EXTEND BRIEFING

(Fourth Request)

Pursuant to Local Rules ("LR") IA 6-1, Defendants, Richard T. Warner, Jr. ("Warner") and Western Express, Inc. ("Western Express"), and Plaintiff, Tracy Nichole Teofrio ("Teofrio"), by and through their respective attorneys, stipulate as follows:

1. On April 13, 2018, Warner and Western Express filed their motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 54]. On May 4, 2018, Teofrio filed her response [ECF No. 58] and, on May 11, 2018, she filed a supplement to her response [ECF No. 62].

2. On May 7, 2018, Warner and Western Express filed their motion to preclude the opinions and testimony of Plaintiff's expert, Paul Herbert [ECF No. 60].

3. On May 11, 2018, Warner and Western Express filed their motion to preclude the opinions and testimony of Plaintiff's expert, James Loong [ECF No. 61].

4. The parties previously requested and obtained an extension to file a reply to the motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 54] and responses to the motions regarding experts Paul Herbert [ECF No. 60] and James Loong [ECF No. 61]. See ECF Nos. 67, 72, 76.

5. The parties have agreed to and request this recent extension, because they have agreed to attend private mediation and counsel for the parties need the opportunity to discuss with the parties the mediation date and whether to complete briefing on these pending motions before mediation or whether the parties desire to extend the completion of briefing until after mediation.

6. This requested extension is reasonably made for the purpose of allowing the parties to weigh the costs and benefits of completing or extending briefing on these pending motions; it is not made for the purpose of unduly delaying resolution of these cases and will not result in any undue delay to the resolution of this case.

7. Therefore, the parties stipulate and agree that deadline for Warner and Western Express to file and serve their reply to their motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 54], that the deadline to file a response to Warner and Western Express' motion to preclude the opinions and testimony of Plaintiff's expert, Paul Herbert [ECF No. 60] be extended to June 29, 2018, and that the deadline to file a response to Warner and Western Express' motion to preclude the opinions and testimony of Plaintiff's expert, James Loong [ECF No. 61] should each be extended to July 6, 2018.

ORDER

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