Osmosis LLC v. Bioregenerative Sciences, Inc. et al, No. 2:2017cv02430 - Document 30 (D. Nev. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER Granting 29 Second Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines. Discovery due by 12/2/2018. Motions due by 1/2/2019. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 1/31/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 8/30/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

Download PDF

Osmosis LLC v. Bioregenerative Sciences, Inc. et al Doc. 30 Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 GARMAN TURNER GORDON LLP ERIC OLSEN Nevada Bar No. 3127 Email: eolsen@gtg.legal DYLAN T. CICILIANO Nevada Bar No. 12348 Email: dciciliano@gtg.legal STEPHEN A. DAVIS Nevada Bar No. 14185 Email: sdavis@gtg.legal 650 White Drive, Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Tel: (725) 777-3000 Fax: (725) 777-3112 Attorneys for Plaintiff Osmosis LLC 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 OSMOSIS LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company 13 Plaintiff, 14 vs. 15 BIOREGENERATIVE SCIENCES, INC., a Nevada Corporation; and NEOGENESIS, INC., a Nevada Corporation. 16 17 18 u CASE NO.: 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES (Second Request) Defendants. 19 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN Plaintiff Osmosis, LLC 20 (“Plaintiff”), by and through its attorneys Eric Olsen, Esq. and Dylan T. Ciciliano, Esq. of Garman 21 Turner Gordon LLP, and Defendants BioRegenerative Sciences, Inc. and NeoGenesis, Inc. 22 (collectively “Defendants”) by and through their attorneys of record, Kurt R. Bonds, Esq. and 23 Adam R. Knecht, Esq. of Alverson, Taylor, Mortenson & Sanders, that the Parties do hereby 24 stipulate and agree that the current discovery cutoff date of September 3, 2018 be continued for a 25 period of ninety (90) days up and including December 2, 2018 as follows: 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 1 of 7 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 2 of 7 1 A. DISCOVERY COMPLETED: 2 1. Initial Disclosures: 3 Defendants served their initial disclosures on Plaintiff on December 14, 2017; bates nos. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 BIO0001-0014. Defendants served their First Supplement to Initial Disclosures on February 12, 2018, bates nos. BIO0015-0094. Plaintiff served its initial disclosures on Defendants on March 14, 2018; bates nos. Osmosis00000001-00007516. Defendants served their Second Supplement to Initial Disclosures on July 26, 2018; bates nos. BIO0095-0341. Defendants served their Third Supplement to Initial Disclosures on August 13, 2018; bates nos. BIO0342-3264. Defendants served their Fourth Supplement to Initial Disclosures on August 17, 2018; bates nos. BIO3265-3649. 15 2. Written Discovery by Plaintiff: 16 On April 19, 2018, Plaintiff served its Requests for Interrogatories, its Requests for 17 18 Production of Documents, and Requests for Admissions. Defendants served their answers to Plaintiff’s Requests for Interrogatories, its 19 Requests for Production of Documents, and Requests for Admissions on May 21, 20 2018. 21 On July 3, 2018, Plaintiff filed their Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and Request for Fees and Costs Under FRCP 37 [ECF No. 24] 22 o The Court granted the First Stipulation for Extension of Time for Discovery 23 on July 11, 2018. 24 25 o On July 13, 2018 the Court denied the motion to compel without prejudice 26 and directed Plaintiff to have a more robust meet and confer. [ECF No. 26] 27 On July 26, 2018, the Court entered the Stipulated Protective Order. [ECF No. 28]. 28 Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 2 of 7 Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 3 of 7 1 On August 13, 2018 Defendants supplemented their initial disclosures, producing 2 3,200 pages of documents, and on August 17, 2018, Defendants supplemented their 3 answers to Plaintiff’s Requests for Interrogatories, its Requests for Production of 4 Documents, and Requests for Admissions. 5 3. Written Discovery by Defendants: 6 On April 27, 2018, Defendants served their Requests for Interrogatories, its Requests for 7 Production of Documents, and Requests for Admissions 8 Plaintiff served its answers to Defendants’ Requests for Interrogatories, its Requests for Production of Documents, and Requests for Admissions on May 25, 9 2018. 10 11 4. Depositions 12 Plaintiff has noticed and continued the depositions of Steven McGee, Gregory Maguire, 13 the 30(b)(6) representative for Defendant Neogenesis, Inc., and the 30(b)(6) representative of 14 Defendant BioRegenerative Sciences, Inc. The depositions were continued because of a discovery 15 dispute that precluded Defendants’ production of documents, as set forth in more detail above. 16 Defendants have noticed and continued the deposition of Susan Raffy. 17 B. 18 COMPLETED. STATEMENT SPECIFYING THE DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE 19 Steven McGee, CEO for Defendant Neogenesis, Inc. 20 Gregory Maguire, CEO for Defendant BioRegenerative Sciences, Inc. 21 30(b)(6) designee for Neogenesis, Inc. 22 30(b)(6) designee for BioRegenerative Sciences, Inc. 23 Dr. Ben Johnson, CEO for Plaintiff Osmosis, LLC. 24 Aaron Burke, Vice President for Osmosis, LLC. 25 30(b)(6) designee for Osmosis, LLC. 26 Susan Raffy, Owner, Susan Raffy Consultants. 27 Additional discovery based upon information discovered in deposition may be necessary. 28 Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 /// 3 of 7 Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 4 of 7 1 Defendants have previously filed a motion to amend their answer to add counterclaims 2 against Plaintiff. Currently, the motion is pending for the Court. Defendants anticipate if the 3 motion is granted that additional discovery with respect to Defendants’ counterclaims will be 4 required. Additionally, the parties intend to supplement their initial disclosures and written 5 discovery. Moreover, both parties also anticipate conducting party, percipient witness, and expert 6 witness depositions, including the possible depositions of third-party witnesses who are not under 7 the control of any of the parties in this litigation. The anticipated depositions have not been 8 completed. Further, one of the witnesses is located in California, which requires additional 9 coordination. 10 11 C. THE REASONS WHY DISCOVERY WAS NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME LIMITS SET BY THE DISCOVERY PLAN. 12 The discovery delay was predominantly caused by the parties’ dispute regarding the 13 production of documents and responses to written discovery. Prior to Defendants’ additional 14 production on documents on August 13, 2018, Defendants produced a total of 94 pages of 15 responsive material. Since that time, an additional 3,000 pages of material has been produced. Due 16 to Defendants’ failure to produce documents, Plaintiff was forced to continue its scheduled 17 depositions of Steven McGee, Gregory Maguire, the 30(b)(6) representative for Defendant 18 Neogenesis, Inc., and the 30(b)(6) representative of Defendant BioRegenerative Sciences, Inc., 19 until those documents were produced. 20 Defendants refused to produce documents until a Stipulated Protective Order was entered. 21 Plaintiff originally sent a Stipulated Protective Order to Defendants on March 12, 2018. ECF No. 22 24-1 p. 50. Despite several emails, Defendants did not respond until 45 days later. Id pp. 73-91. 23 After Plaintiff filed its Motion to Compel on July 3, 2018, ECF No. 24, which was subsequently 24 denied on July 13, 2018, ECF No. 26, the parties were able to reach an agreement; on the Stipulated 25 Protective Order, which was subsequently granted on July 26, 2018. ECF No. 28. 26 Since the Order was entered, Defendants have produced responsive documents to 27 Plaintiff’s discovery requests. However, prior to that time, it was not possible to schedule 28 depositions. With discovery continuing, Plaintiff and Defendants are arranging dates to conduct Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 4 of 7 Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 5 of 7 1 the above depositions. Given that the parties are not located in Nevada, the parties must coordinate 2 schedules. 3 Furthermore, Defendants have previously filed a motion to amend their answer to add 4 counterclaims against Plaintiff. Currently, that motion is pending. Defendants anticipate if the 5 motion is granted that additional discovery with respect to Defendants’ counterclaims will be 6 required. 7 D. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS TO EXTEND THE DISCOVERY DEADLINE. 8 Local Rule 26-4 requires that any stipulation made to extend discovery made within 21 9 days of the deadline must be supported by good cause. The good cause standard under LR 26-4 is 10 the same as the good cause standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). Winfeld v. Wal-mart Stores, 11 Inc., 2:14-cv-01034-MMD-CWH, 2016 WL 3360658, at *1 (D. Nev. Jun. 9, 2016). “Good cause 12 to extend a discovery deadline exists ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the 13 part[ies] seeking extension.’” Nunez v. Harper, 2:13-CV-0392-GMN-NJK, 2014 WL 2808985, at 14 *2 (D. Nev. June 20, 2014) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 15 (9th Cir. 1992)). 16 A discovery dispute, which was briefed to the Court by Plaintiff, was resolved in or about 17 July 2018. After the resolution, Defendants produced the vast majority of their documentary 18 evidence in the case. While Plaintiff’s counsel is continuing review of Defendants’ supplements 19 to their initial disclosures and their supplemental written discovery requests, it is likely that there 20 are still responsive documents that need to be produced and reviewed before the depositions for 21 both parties may occur. Likewise, given the costs associated with depositions of out-of-state 22 deponents, the depositions could not reasonably and economically go forward until the parties had 23 marshalled and produced the majority of evidence. As that has apparently now occurred, 24 depositions can proceed. Accordingly, good cause exists to grant the extension of discovery. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 5 of 7 Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 6 of 7 1 E. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING ALL REMAINING 2 DISCOVERY: 3 1. Discovery Cut-Off 4 The discovery cut-off shall be extended from September 3, 2018 to December 2, 2018. 5 2. Amending the Pleadings and Adding Parties 6 The deadline to amend the pleadings and parties has closed. No such request to amend the 7 pleadings or add parties is requested 8 3. Expert Disclosure 9 The deadline to name initial experts disclosures has closed. No such request to name 10 experts is requested. 11 4. Dispositive Motions 12 In accordance with Local Rule 26-1(e)(4), the last day for filing dispositive motions 13 including, but not limited to motions for summary judgement, shall be extended from October 3, 14 2018 to January 2, 2019. 15 5. Pre-Trial Order 16 In accordance with Local Rule 26-1(e)(5), the last day to file a Joint Pre-Trial Order, 17 including any disclosures pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(3), shall be extended from November 2, 2018 18 to January 31, 2009, 2019. In the event dispositive motions are filed, the date for filing the Joint 19 Pre-Trial Order shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision on the dispositive 20 motions or upon further order by the Court extending the time period in which to file the Joint Pre- 21 Trial Order. 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 6 of 7 Case 2:17-cv-02430-JAD-CWH Document 29 Filed 08/29/18 Page 7 of 7 1 6. Trial and Calendar Call 2 No trial has been set in this matter. 3 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 4 DATED this 29th day of August, 2018. 5 GARMAN TURNER GORDON LLP 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 /s/ Stephen A. Davis ERIC OLSEN Nevada Bar No. 3127 DYLAN T. CICILIANO Nevada Bar No. 12348 STEPHEN A. DAVIS Nevada Bar No. 14185 650 White Drive, Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Tel: (725) 777-3000 Fax: (725) 777-3112 Attorneys for Plaintiff Osmosis LLC 14 15 16 DATED this 29th day of August, 2018. /s/ George Koons ALVERSON, TAYLOR, MORTENSEN & SANDERS KURT R. BONDS Nevada Bar No. 6228 ADAM R. KNECHT Nevada Bar No. 13166 6605 Grand Montecito Parkway, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89149 Tel: (702) 385-7000 Fax: (702) 385-7000 KOONS LAW GROUP, LTD. GEORGE KOONS II 1153 Bergen Parkway, Suite 405 Evergreen, Colorado 80439 Tel: (303) 600-8577 Fax: (303) 974-1188 Attorneys for Defendants Bioregenerative Sciences, Inc. and Neogenesis 17 18 ORDER 19 20 21 22 23 The above Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Second Request) is hereby GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 ______________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 August 30, 2018 Dated: ________________________________ 26 27 28 Garman Turner Gordon LLP Attorneys At Law 650 White Dr., Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (725) 777-3000 7 of 7

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.