JOINT RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE COURT SHOULD NOT IMPOSE MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST COUNSEL FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT'S MINUTE ORDER [ECF NO. 98]

PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.

Bank of America, N.A. (BANA), Nevada Association Services, Inc. (NAS), and Travata and Montage at Summerlin Centre Homeowners' Association (HOA) hereby respond jointly to the court's order to show cause [ECF No. 101] why the court should not impose monetary sanctions against counsel for failure to comply with the court's minute order [ECF No. 98] as follows:

RESPONSE

1. On September 19, 2018, this Court held a settlement conference with the parties to this litigation at which BANA, the HOA and NAS were able to reach a settlement to resolve the claims BANA asserts against the HOA and NAS. [See ECF No. 98].

2. Following the settlement conference, this Court issued a Minute Order on September 19, 2018 ordering the settling parties' counsel to appear for a telephonic status check on November 19, 2018. Id. The Court further stated the telephonic status check would be automatically vacated upon the filing of a stipulation to dismiss the claims among the settling parties.

3. The settling parties' counsel failed to comply with the Minute Order and this Court issued an Order to Show Cause why monetary sanctions should not be issued for noncompliance on November 21, 2018. [ECF No. 101]

4. Prior to the settlement conference, counsel for the HOA and BANA reached an agreement to settle the claims between their clients—an HOA and a bank—in a state court action involving similar facts and claims to the present litigation. The parties intended to use the settlement agreement in that case as a template for the settlement reached in this action, thereby avoiding the need to renegotiate settlement impediments.

5. Though close, the parties had not yet finalized the terms of the state court settlement agreement by the time of the status check in this case, preventing the finalization of settlement in the present action and precluding the dismissal of the claims among the settling parties.

6. Following the telephonic status check on November 19, 2018, the settling parties have sought to resolve the instant litigation regardless of the status of the settlement agreement in the state court action.

7. BANA's counsel has circulated a settlement agreement purporting to resolve the settled claims. NAS's counsel and the HOA's counsel have responded with comments, which have been incorporated into a near-final version. The parties do not anticipate any further substantial revisions or delays.

8. The parties are in the process of finalizing the agreement for execution by their clients. The settling parties anticipate the execution of the settlement documents, including the stipulation to dismiss all claims among the settling parties within fourteen (14) days (December 19, 2018).

9. In light of the parties' efforts to effectuate the dismissal of the settled claims as soon as practicable following the Court's issuance of the Order to Show Cause, the settling parties respectfully request this Court suspend the issuance of monetary sanctions against the settling parties for fourteen (14) days and that the Court will be satisfied that sanctions are not warranted if the settling parties submit a stipulation to dismiss all claims among the settling parties on or before December 19, 2018. This the 5th day of December, 2018. This the 5th day of December, 2018.

IT IS SO ORDERED.