Filed: Mar. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 25, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT CARL W. HOFFMAN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs Anthony Mitchell, Linda Mitchell, and Michael Mitchell (collectively "Plaintiffs"), Defendants City of Henderson, Nevada, Angela Walker, and Christopher Worley (collectively, the "Henderson Defendants"), and Defendants City of North Las Vegas, Joseph Chronister, Michael Waller, Drew Albers, David Cawthorn, Eric Rockwell, and Travis Snyder (
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT CARL W. HOFFMAN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs Anthony Mitchell, Linda Mitchell, and Michael Mitchell (collectively "Plaintiffs"), Defendants City of Henderson, Nevada, Angela Walker, and Christopher Worley (collectively, the "Henderson Defendants"), and Defendants City of North Las Vegas, Joseph Chronister, Michael Waller, Drew Albers, David Cawthorn, Eric Rockwell, and Travis Snyder (c..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
CARL W. HOFFMAN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiffs Anthony Mitchell, Linda Mitchell, and Michael Mitchell (collectively "Plaintiffs"), Defendants City of Henderson, Nevada, Angela Walker, and Christopher Worley (collectively, the "Henderson Defendants"), and Defendants City of North Las Vegas, Joseph Chronister, Michael Waller, Drew Albers, David Cawthorn, Eric Rockwell, and Travis Snyder (collectively, the "North Las Vegas Defendants"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree, subject to this Court's approval, as follows:
(1) on March 14, 2016, the last day for Plaintiffs to seek leave to amend their pleading pursuant to the Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Third Request) (Dkt. 68), Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint ("Motion") (Dkt. 71), attaching as Exhibit 1, a proposed Second Amended Complaint ("Proposed SAC") (Dkt. 71-1);
(2) upon receipt of the Motion and Proposed SAC, counsel for the Henderson Defendants discovered that the Proposed SAC referred to content in, and directly quoted from, documents produced in discovery as "Confidential" pursuant to the Stipulated Confidentiality and Protective Order signed by the Court ("Protective Order") (Dkt. 62), and that, consequently, the filing of the Proposed SAC on the Court's public docket violated the Protective Order;
(3) after counsel for the Henderson Defendants informed Plaintiffs' counsel of the same and demanded that the violation be immediately cured, on March 20, 2016, Plaintiffs moved the Court on an emergency basis to withdraw the Motion and Proposed SAC and refile the same under seal ("Motion to Seal") (Dkt. 72);
(4) thereafter, on March 22, 2016, the Court issued an order denying the Motion to Seal and ordering the parties to meet and confer "regarding which portions of the proposed second amended complaint violate the protective order and to discuss whether redaction of selected portions of the proposed pleading, or in the alternative wholesale revision of the proposed pleading, are appropriate" ("Order") (Dkt. 73); and
(5) the parties desire to maintain and protect the confidential nature of the information contained in the Proposed SAC while they meet and confer as ordered by the Court.
WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that the Court issue an order providing the following:
(a) ordering the Clerk to STRIKE the Motion (Dkt. 71) and the Proposed SAC (Dkt. 71-1) from the docket in the above captioned action, thus rendering them inaccessible;
(b) that the parties shall meet and confer in accordance with the Court's Order regarding which portions of the proposed second amended complaint violate the protective order and to discuss whether redaction of selected portions of the proposed pleading, or in the alternative wholesale revision of the proposed pleading, are appropriate;
(c) on or before Friday, April 1, 2016, Plaintiffs shall refile and serve the Motion, either redacting the portions of the Proposed SAC that violate the Protective Order, or attaching a revised Proposed SAC that does not violate the Protective Order ("Refiled Motion");
(d) as the Refiled Motion will be filed after the March 14, 2016, deadline, the Henderson Defendants and the North Las Vegas Defendants waive their right to challenge the timeliness of the Refiled Motion as it relates to the necessity to refile the Motion in light of the facts outlined herein. The Henderson Defendants and the North Las Vegas Defendants reserve all of their rights to challenge the timeliness of the relief sought in the Refiled Motion in all other respects;
(e) on or before Friday, April 15, 2016, the Henderson Defendants and the North Las Vegas Defendants shall file and serve their Responses to the Refiled Motion; and
(f) Plaintiffs' Reply in support of the Refiled Motion will be due in accordance with Local Rule 7-2.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
