Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

SWADLING v. STATE, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 2:15-cv-01588-APG-PAL. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20160413a39 Visitors: 16
Filed: Apr. 11, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINES SET FORTH IN THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN (FIRST REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF DEADLINES SET FORTH IN THE PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1(b) and 26-4, Plaintiff, Bonnie Swadling, and Defendant, State of Nevada, ex rel its Department of Corrections, by and through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate and agree to modify the Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (Doc. No. 27) as set forth below. Defendant
More

STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINES SET FORTH IN THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND DISCOVERY PLAN

(FIRST REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF DEADLINES SET FORTH IN THE

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1(b) and 26-4, Plaintiff, Bonnie Swadling, and Defendant, State of Nevada, ex rel its Department of Corrections, by and through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate and agree to modify the Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (Doc. No. 27) as set forth below.

Defendant, NDOC, has not yet filed an Answer in this case. On October 28, 2015, NDOC, filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. No. 11) with prejudice for insufficient service of process under FRCP 12(b)(5) and for failure to state a claim for relief under FRCP 12(b)(6). The Motion to Dismiss has been fully briefed by the parties and is currently pending with the Court. On December 28, 2015, Plaintiff, Bonnie Swadling, filed a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 18). The parties are still in the process of briefing the issues raised in the Motion for Leave. The Early Neutral Evaluation has is currently scheduled for April 5, 2016 (Doc. No. 21). The subject of discovery will be dependent upon the Court's decision on these motions and potentially the result of the Early Neutral Evaluation. If NDOC's Motion to Dismiss is granted, discovery will not be necessary at all.

A. Discovery Deadlines

1. Last Date to Complete Discovery — The original discovery deadline is April 25, 2016. The parties stipulate and agree to extend the discovery deadline by 120 days to August 23, 2016.

2. Last Date to Disclose Experts — The original deadline to disclose experts is February 25, 2016. The parties stipulate and agree to extend the expert disclosure deadline to June 24, 2016 (60 days before the stipulated extended discovery deadline of August 23, 2016).

3. Last Date to Disclose Rebuttal Experts — The original deadline for disclosures regarding rebuttal experts is March 28, 2016. The parties stipulate and agree to extend the deadline for rebuttal disclosures to July 24, 2016 (30 days before the stipulated extended discovery deadline of August 23, 2016).

B. Dispositive Motion Deadline

The original deadline to file dispositive motions is May 25, 2016. The parties stipulate and agree that the last day to file dispositive motions is extended to September 22, 2015 (30 days after the stipulated extended discovery deadline).

C. Pretrial Order

The deadline to file a Joint Pretrial Order is currently June 24, 2016. The parties stipulate and agree that the last day to file a Joint Pretrial Order is extended to October 22, 2016 (30 days after the stipulated extended dispositive motion deadline). In the event dispositive motions are filed, the last day to file the Joint Pretrial order shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision for dispositive motions has been entered.

This stipulation is made for good cause, to avoid unnecessary expense to the parties including discovery costs, to promote judicial economy, and is not for the purpose of delay. The stipulation will also provide the parties with time to discuss potential settlement prior to conducting significant discovery.

To date NDOC has served its Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP 24. No other discovery has been conducted because there is a dispute as to jurisdiction and improper service of the Complaint. All other form of discovery remains to be completed. NDOC, the sole Defendant in this action, is seeking dismissal on the grounds of insufficient service of process and failure to state a claim. As such, NDOC has not yet filed an Answer in this case.

This is the first request for extension of time regarding deadlines set forth in the Scheduling Order and Discovery Plan and the fourth extension sought to date in the entire action. On December 3, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 14). On January 25, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint. On January 29, 2016, Plaintiff filed a second Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint, which is currently pending with the Court.

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