Sears et al v. Mid Valley Enterprises, LLC et al, No. 2:2019cv00532 - Document 59 (D. Nev. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER granting 57 Stipulation; The Parties' deadline to submit a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order pursuant to LR 26-1(a) is STAYED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 6/12/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Sears et al v. Mid Valley Enterprises, LLC et al Doc. 59 Case 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA Document 57 Filed 06/11/20 Page 1 of 6 1 WOLF, RIFKIN, SHAPIRO, SCHULMAN & RABKIN, LLP Don Springmeyer 2 Nevada Bar No. 1021 Bradley S. Schrager 3 Nevada Bar No. 10217 3556 E. Russell Road, Second Floor 4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120 (702) 341-5200/Fax: (702) 341-5300 5 dspringmeyer@wrslawyers.com bschrager@wrslawyers.com 6 Local Counsel for Plaintiffs (Additional counsel appear on signature page) 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 10 KATHERINE SEARS and VIRGINIA SEGANOS, individually, and on behalf of all 11 others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, 12 13 vs. 14 MID VALLEY ENTERPRISES, LLC and PAHRUMP ICS LLC, doing business as 15 “SHERI’S RANCH” Case No.: 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER (FIRST REQUEST) Defendants. 16 17 18 WHEREAS, on March 29, 2019, Plaintiffs KATHERINE SEARS and VIRGINIA 19 SEGANOS (“Plaintiffs”) filed a putative class and collective action complaint in the United 20 States District Court, District of Nevada, asserting claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act 21 (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §201, et seq. and Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 608.016 and 608.018, and Article 22 15, Section 16 of the Nevada Constitution (collectively the “Nevada Claims”). [ECF No. 1]. 23 WHEREAS, on May 24, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Collective and Class 24 Action Complaint with Jury Demand [ECF No. 25]. 25 WHEREAS, on June 7, 2019, Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss First Amended 26 Collective Action and Class Complaint with Jury Demand [ECF No. 30]. 27 WHEREAS, on April 16, 2020, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss was granted insofar as it 28 1 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER 111312456.v1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA Document 57 Filed 06/11/20 Page 2 of 6 1 sought dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Nevada Claims (which the Court dismissed without prejudice for 2 lack of subject matter jurisdiction), but was denied as to Plaintiffs’ FLSA claims. [ECF No. 40]. 3 WHEREAS, on April 27, 2020, Plaintiffs filed their Pre-Discovery Motion for 4 Conditional Certification and Court-Authorized Notice to Potential Opt-In Plaintiffs Pursuant to 5 Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216 (b) (“Motion for Conditional Certification”) [ECF No. 41]. 6 WHEREAS, on April 29, 2020, Defendants filed their Motion for Interlocutory Appeal of 7 Order Denying Dismissal of Plaintiffs' Fair Labor Standards Act Collective Action [28 U.S.C. 8 Section 1292(b)] (“Motion for Interlocutory Appeal”) [ECF No. 42]. 9 WHEREAS, on April 30, 2020, Defendants filed their Motion to Stay All Proceedings 10 Pending a Final Ruling on the Issues Raised by Defendants’ Motion to Certify the Court’s April 11 16, 2020, Order for Interlocutory Review Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(b) (“Motion to 12 Stay”) [ECF No. 43]. 13 WHEREAS, on April 30, 2020, Defendants filed their Answer to Plaintiffs’ First 14 Amended Collective and Class Action Complaint with Jury Demand [ECF No. 44]. 15 WHEREAS, LR 26-1(a) requires the conference pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) to be 16 held “within 30 days after the first defendant answers or otherwise appears” and for the 17 “stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order” to be submitted within 14 days thereafter. 18 WHEREAS, the parties have conferred pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and agree that it 19 is reasonable to refrain from formulating a discovery plan or conducting discovery pending the 20 outcome of: (1) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional Certification; (2) Defendants’ Motion for 21 Interlocutory Appeal; and, (3) Defendants’ Motion to Stay; all of which are fully briefed. The 22 parties further agree that the appropriate time to submit a proposed discovery plan would be after 23 the Court rules on the pending motions, and specifically Defendants’ Motion for Interlocutory 24 Appeal and Defendants’ Motion to Stay. If the Court grants either of Defendants’ pending 25 motions, the time for submitting a proposed discovery plan will be stayed until after the 26 interlocutory appeal is resolved. If the Court denies Defendants’ pending motions, the 27 appropriate time to submit a proposed discovery plan would be 21 days from either the close of 28 2 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER 111312456.v1 Case 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA Document 57 Filed 06/11/20 Page 3 of 6 1 the opt-in period (if Plaintiffs’ Motion is granted), or 21 days from the denial of Plaintiffs’ 2 Motion. At that juncture, the parties will know exactly which Plaintiffs and collective members 3 are asserting claims in this case, and whether their claims are asserted solely on an individual 4 basis or on a collective basis as well. Knowing this information will enable the parties to avoid 5 disputes over discovery regarding non-participating putative collective members, and to properly 6 gauge what discovery will be needed. 7 STIPULATION 8 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between 9 Plaintiffs and Defendants, through their respective undersigned counsel of record, that: 10 1. The Parties’ deadline to submit a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order 11 pursuant to LR 26-1(a) is STAYED pending the resolution of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional 12 Certification. [ECF No. 41], Defendants’ Motion for Interlocutory Appeal [ECF No. 42] and 13 Defendants’ Motion to Stay [ECF No. 43]. 14 2. If the Court grants Defendants’ Motion for Interlocutory Appeal or Defendants’ 15 Motion to Stay, the time for submitting a proposed discovery plan will be stayed until after the 16 interlocutory appeal is resolved. If the Court denies Defendants’ pending motions, the 17 appropriate time to submit a proposed discovery plan would be 21 days from either the close of 18 / / / 19 / / / 20 / / / 21 / / / 22 / / / 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 3 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER 111312456.v1 Case 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA Document 57 Filed 06/11/20 Page 4 of 6 1 the opt-in period (if Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional Certification is granted), or 21 days from 2 the denial of Plaintiffs’ Motion. 3 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 4 DATED June 11, 2020. 5 WOLF, RIFKIN, SHAPIRO, SCHULMAN & RABKIN, LLP 6 By: /s/ Don Springmeyer 7 Don Springmeyer 8 Nevada Bar No. 1021 Bradley S. Schrager 9 Nevada Bar No. 10217 3556 E. Russell Road, Second Floor 10 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120 (702) 341-5200/Fax: (702) 341-5300 11 dspringmeyer@wrslawyers.com bschrager@wrslawyers.com 12 Local Counsel for Plaintiffs 13 Jason T. Brown (PHV) 14 Nicholas Conlon (PHV) BROWN, LLC 15 111 Town Square Place, Suite 400 Jersey City, NJ 07310 16 Phone: (201) 630-0000 jtb@jtblawgroup.com 17 nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com 18 Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP By: /s/ Mark J. Connot Mark J. Connot (10010) Colleen E. McCarty (13186) Lucy C. Crow (15203) 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, #700 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 (702) 262-6899 tel (702) 597-5503 fax mconnot@foxrothschild.com cmccarty@foxrothschild.com lcrow@foxrothschild.com Colin D. Dougherty (Pro Hac Vice) FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP 10 Sentry Parkway, Suite 200 P.O. Box 3001 Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422 (610) 397-6500 tel (610) 397-0450 fax Attorneys for Defendants Mid Valley Enterprises, LLC and Pahrump ICS LLC d/b/a Sheri’s Ranch 19 ORDER 20 21 The Court having considered the foregoing stipulation of the Parties, and good cause 22 appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: The Parties’ deadline to submit a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order pursuant 23 24 to LR 26-1(a) is STAYED pending the resolution of Defendants’ Motion for Interlocutory 25 Appeal [ECF No. 42] and Defendants’ Motion to Stay [ECF No. 43]. 26 If the Court grants Defendants’ Motion for Interlocutory Appeal or Defendants’ Motion 27 to Stay, the time for submitting a proposed discovery plan will be stayed until after the 28 4 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER 111312456.v1 Case 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA Document 57 Filed 06/11/20 Page 5 of 6 1 interlocutory appeal is resolved. If the Court denies Defendants’ pending motions, the 2 appropriate time to submit a proposed discovery plan would be 21 days from either the close of 3 the opt-in period (if Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional Certification is granted), or 21 days fro m 4 the denial of Plaintiffs’ Motion. 5 6 June 12, 2020 DATED __________________ 7 US DISTRICT COURT JUDGE OR Daniel J. Albregts MAGISTRATE JUDGE United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER 111312456.v1 Case 2:19-cv-00532-APG-DJA Document 57 Filed 06/11/20 Page 6 of 6 1 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 11th day of June, 2020, a true and correct copy 3 of STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY 4 PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER was served via the United States District Court CM/ECF 5 system on all parties or persons requiring notice. By: /s/ Christie Rehfeld Christie Rehfeld, an Employee of WOLF, RIFKIN, SHAPIRO, SCHULMAN & RABKIN, LLP 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PARTIES TO SUBMIT DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER 111312456.v1
]]>
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.
