Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Shipman v. NAV-LVH Casino, LLC, 2:16-cv-02722-JCM-CWH. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180615e37 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 13, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO EXTEND DISCOVERY AND OTHER DEADLINES (Fifth Request) CARL W. HOFFMAN , Magistrate Judge . COME NOW, Plaintiff, named above, by and through his counsel of record, MICHAEL P. BALABAN, ESQ., and Defendant, named above, by and through its attorneys of record, MYRNA L. MAYSONET, ESQ., CHERISH A BENEDICT, ESQ., and PHILLIP A. SILVESTRI, ESQ., pursuant to Local Rule 26-4, and herein stipulate, agree and make joint application to extend the discovery cut-off and related
More

STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO EXTEND DISCOVERY AND OTHER DEADLINES

(Fifth Request)

COME NOW, Plaintiff, named above, by and through his counsel of record, MICHAEL P. BALABAN, ESQ., and Defendant, named above, by and through its attorneys of record, MYRNA L. MAYSONET, ESQ., CHERISH A BENEDICT, ESQ., and PHILLIP A. SILVESTRI, ESQ., pursuant to Local Rule 26-4, and herein stipulate, agree and make joint application to extend the discovery cut-off and related dates for a period of thirty (30) days up to and including August 1, 2018. The present discovery cut-off date is July 2, 2018, and no calendar call date or trial date has been set.

The parties attempted to make this request in accordance with LR 26-4 and the prior scheduling Order, which provides that requests for further discovery extensions must be made no later than twenty-one (21) days before the existing discovery cut-off date, or, here, by June 11, 2018. Due to communication delays, the parties were unable to agree to terms of the extension until approximately midnight on June 11, 2018. The parties submit this request as soon as practicable after agreement. This is the fifth request for an extension.

The parties have completed written discovery and are in the process of scheduling depositions. A number of key witnesses have moved and/or are no longer working for defendant. Witnesses have also moved out of state. While the parties are in the process of locating the witnesses, it has taken more time than anticipated. The parties have agreed to conduct several depositions prior to the current close of discovery, however. Counsel for both parties have other cases before this Court, which involve overlapping witnesses to some extent and, thus, the attorneys for both parties are coordinating the scheduling of the depositions in such cases to minimize the burden on the witnesses and travel for out-of-state counsel.

The parties and their attorneys have diligently worked to complete discovery as expediently as possible and will continue to try to complete the remaining discovery in as expedient a manner as possible.

Given the above, the parties request that the discovery period be extended as follows:

Activity Former Date Requested Date Discovery Cut-Off Date 07/02/18 08/01/18 Dispositive Motions 07/31/18 08/31/18 Pretrial Order 08/28/18 09/30/181

In accordance with LR 26-4 the parties understand that any further requests for discovery extensions must be made no later than twenty-one (21) days before the new proposed discovery cut-off date of August 2, 2018, or no later than twenty-one (21) days before any other deadline sought to be extended.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Or 30 days after the decision on the last dispositive motion.
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