CARDOZA v. BLOOMIN' BRANDS, INC., 2:13-cv-01820-JAD-NJK. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20150819b33
Visitors: 2
Filed: Aug. 18, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2015
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . On July 17, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion to extend, inter alia, the deadline for certification experts. Docket No. 320. In briefing that motion, however, Plaintiffs also expressed uncertainty as to whether they would retain a certification expert if the motion to extend was granted and stated that they were seeking the extension "out of an abundance of caution." See Docket No. 329 at 2. On August 3, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to file
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . On July 17, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion to extend, inter alia, the deadline for certification experts. Docket No. 320. In briefing that motion, however, Plaintiffs also expressed uncertainty as to whether they would retain a certification expert if the motion to extend was granted and stated that they were seeking the extension "out of an abundance of caution." See Docket No. 329 at 2. On August 3, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to file a..
More
ORDER
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
On July 17, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion to extend, inter alia, the deadline for certification experts. Docket No. 320. In briefing that motion, however, Plaintiffs also expressed uncertainty as to whether they would retain a certification expert if the motion to extend was granted and stated that they were seeking the extension "out of an abundance of caution." See Docket No. 329 at 2. On August 3, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to file a statement by August 17, 2015 indicating whether they intend to hire a certification expert such that a ruling is necessary on their motion to extend the deadline for such an expert. See Docket No. 331.
Now pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' notice requesting a ruling because the "parties have not come to an agreement on the issue." Docket No. 338.1 The notice does not address the Court's central concern, which was that it was not inclined to address the issue given that Plaintiffs were unsure if they would retain a certification expert in the event the motion to extend was granted. The Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiffs to file a notice, no later than noon on August 19, 2015, indicating whether they will retain a certification expert in the event their motion to extend is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The notice was filed on August 18, 2015, after the deadline set by the Court.
Source: Leagle
