Perez v. Twyoford et al, No. 2:2018cv00034 - Document 30 (D. Nev. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER Granting 29 Second Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines. Discovery due by 1/4/2019. Motions due by 2/8/2019. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 3/8/2019. If dispositive motions are filed the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order will be suspended until 30 days after decision on the dispositive motions or further court order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 8/24/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

Download PDF

Perez v. Twyoford et al 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Doc. 30 SAO Alex J. De Castroverde Nevada Bar No. 6950 Orlando De Castroverde Nevada Bar No. 7320 De CASTROVERDE LAW GROUP 1149 South Maryland Parkway Las Vegas, Nevada 89104 Tel. 702.383.0606 Fax:702.383.8741 Email: Alex@decastroverdelaw.com Email: Orlando@decastroverdelaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 12 TAMILENE TANYA PEREZ, 13 Plaintiff, 14 CASE NO.:2:18-cv-00034-APG-VCF STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES v. 15 17 TIMOTHY TWYFORD; J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC.; DOES I-X, inclusive, and ROE CORPORATIONS I-X, inclusive, 18 Defendant. 16 [SECOND REQUEST] 19 20 The undersigned, on behalf of Plaintiff, Tamilene Tanya Perez, and Defendants, 21 Timothy Twyford and J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., hereby stipulate to extend the remaining 22 deadlines in the current scheduling order and discovery plan in this matter for a period 23 24 of sixty (60) days for the reasons explained herein, and under Local Rule 6-1(b). 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 Page 1 of 6 Dockets.Justia.com I. 1 2 DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE 3 (list individually and include date document was served) 4 1. The Parties have conducted an FRCP 26(f) conference and have served 5 6 their respective FRCP 26(a) disclosures; 7 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Admission to Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.; 8 3. Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents to Defendant J.B. Hunt 9 Transport Inc.; 10 4. Plaintiff’s Interrogatories to Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.; 5. Plaintiff’s Request for Admission to Defendant Timothy Twyford 13 6. Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents to Defendant Timothy 14 Twyford; 15 7. Plaintiff’s Interrogatories to Defendant Timothy Twyford; 8. Defendants’ First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Tamilene Tanya Perez; 9. Defendants’ First Set of Requests for Admissions to Plaintiff Tamilene 11 12 16 17 18 19 20 21 Tanya Perez; 10. Defendants’ First Set of Request for Production to Plaintiff Tamilene Tanya Perez; 22 23 24 25 26 27 11. Plaintiff’s Responses to Defendant’s First Request for Admissions to Plaintiff; 12. Plaintiff’s Responses to Defendant’s First Request for Production of Documents to Plaintiff; 13. Plaintiff’s Answers to Defendant’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff; 28 Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 14. Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.’s Answers to Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories; 15. Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.’s First Supplemental Answers to Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories; 5 6 7 8 9 10 16. Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport Inc.’s Responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Admission; 17. Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.’s Reponses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents; 18. Defendant Timothy Twyford’s Answers to Plaintiff’s Interrogatories; 19. Defendant Timothy Twyford’s Answers to Plaintiff’s Request for 11 12 13 14 15 16 Admission; 20. Defendant Timothy Twyford’s Responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents; 21. Plaintiff’s Deposition; 22. Defendant Timothy Twyford’s Deposition; 17 18 19 II. 20 DISCOVERY TO BE COMPLETED 21 1. Additional written discovery; 2. Deposition of Defendant’s FRCP 30(b)(6) witness; 24 3. Initial Expert Disclosures; 25 4. Rebuttal Expert Disclosures; and 26 5. Dispositive Motions. 22 23 27 28 Page 3 of 6 III. 1 REASON THAT DISCOVERY HAS NOT YET BEEN COMPLETED 2 3 4 Parties require additional time as Defendant J.B. Hunt’s Motion to Quash 30(b)(6) Deposition and for Protective Order is pending. 5 6 The Local Rules of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada 7 include additional provisions relating to the extension or reopening of discovery. 8 Specifically, Local Rule 6-1 governs requests for continuances and extensions in 9 general, stating: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 (a) Every motion requesting a continuance, extension of time, or order shortening time shall be Filed by the clerk and processed as an expedited matter. Ex parte motions and stipulations shall be governed by LR 6-2. (b) Every motion or stipulation to extend time shall inform the court of any previous extensions granted and state the reasons for the extension requested A request made after the expiration of the specified period shall not be granted unless the moving party, attorney, or other person demonstrates that the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect. Immediately below the title of such motion or stipulation there shall also be included a statement indicating whether it is the first, second, third, etc., requested extension, i.e.: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE MOTIONS (Second Request) (c) The court may set aside any extension obtained in contravention of this rule. (d) A stipulation or motion seeking to extend the time to file an opposition or final reply to a motion, or to extend the time fixed for hearing a motion, must state in its opening paragraph the filing date of the motion. 24 25 26 27 28 Local Rule 26-4 specifically refers to the extension of scheduled deadlines, stating: Applications to extend any date set by the discovery plan, scheduling order, or other order must, in addition to satisfying the requirements of LR 6-1, be supported by a showing of good cause for the Page 4 of 6 extension. All motions or stipulations to extend discovery shall be received by the court within twenty (20) days before the discovery cut-off date or any extension thereof. Any motion or stipulation to extend or to reopen discovery shall include: (a) A statement specifying the discovery completed; (b) A specific description of the discovery that remains to be completed; (c) The reasons why discovery remaining was not completed within the time limits set by the discovery plan; and (d) A proposed schedule for completing all remaining discovery. 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. No Party Will Be Prejudiced in Any Manner By an Extension of the Discovery Period. 7 8 No party will be prejudiced by an extension of the discovery deadline. Notably, 9 10 both Parties agree that an extension would be beneficial. An extension will allow each 11 party to further prepare its respective case for trial. Forcing the Parties to proceed to 12 trial without the necessary discovery will affect every aspect of the trial. It will manifestly 13 prejudice both sides ability to prepare and present their respective cases. See Martel v. 14 15 County of Los Angeles, 34 F.3d 731, 735 (9th Cir. 1994). 2. The Movant Acted in Good Faith at All Times. 16 17 Here, both Parties are agreeable to the extension and have acted in good faith to 18 request the same. The Parties have no intent, nor reason, to delay the resolution. Both 19 Parties eagerly looked forward to attempting to resolve this matter. 20 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 25 26 27 28 Page 5 of 6 V. 1 2 3 PROPOSED NEW DISCOVERY DEADLINES Amend Pleadings November 6, 2018 Interim Status Report November 6, 2018 Discovery Cut-off January 4, 2019 7 Expert Disclosures November 6, 2018 8 Expert Rebuttal December 7, 2018 9 Dispositive Motions February 8, 2019 Joint Pretrial Order March 8, 2019 4 5 6 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 DATED this 24th day of August, 2018. DE CASTROVERDE LAW GROUP DATED this 24th day of August 2018. THORPE SHWER, P.C. By: /s/ David Menocal_____________ David Menocal Nevada Bar No. 13191 1149 S. Maryland Pkwy. Las Vegas, Nevada 89104 Attorney for Plaintiff By: /s/ William Thorpe___________ William L. Thorpe Arizona Bar No. 005641 3200 North Central Ave., Suite 1560 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 Attorney for Defendants 17 18 19 20 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED: _________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8-24-2018 DATED: ________________ 23 24 25 26 If dispositive motions are filed, the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order will be suspended until 30 days after decision on the dispositive motions or further court order. 27 28 Page 6 of 6

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.