Johnson v. GEICO Advantage Insurance Company, No. 2:2021cv01213 - Document 9 (D. Nev. 2021)
Court Description: SCHEDULING ORDER granting 8 Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order; Discovery due by 4/4/2022. Motions due by 5/4/2022. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 6/3/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah on 8/2/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRS)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Johnson v. GEICO Advantage Insurance Company 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Doc. 9 THOMAS E. WINNER Nevada Bar No. 5168 LARA L. MILLER Nevada Bar No. 12618 WINNER BOOZE & ZARCONE 1117 South Rancho Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 Phone (702) 243-7000 Facsimile (702) 243-7059 twinner@winnerfirm.com lmiller@winnerfirm.com Attorneys for Defendant Geico Advantage Insurance Company 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 12 JONGEUN JOHNSON, CASE NO.: 2:21-cv-01213-RFB-EJY DEPT. NO.: Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 GEICO ADVANTAGE INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign company; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X, inclusive, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 STIPULATED DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER Defendants. Defendant, GEICO ADVANTAGE INSURANCE COMPANY, (hereinafter “GEICO”), by and through its counsel, the law offices of WINNER, BOOZE & ZARCONE LTD, and Plaintiff, JONGEUN JOHNSON, by and through her counsel of record, ALDRICH LAW FIRM, hereby submit the following Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order pursuant to L.R 26-1(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). PROPOSED SCHEDULE 24 1. Meeting: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), a telephonic meeting was held on July 30, 25 2021, and was attended by Lara L. Miller of Winner, Booze & Zarcone for Defendant 26 and Catherine Hernandez of Aldrich Law Firm for Plaintiff. 27 2. Initial Disclosures: The parties agreed that no changes to the form, content or timing of 28 Page 1 of 6 Dockets.Justia.com 1 the disclosures under FRCP 26(a) are necessary. As such, initial disclosures will be 2 served by both parties on or before August 13, 2021. Based upon counsels’ review of 3 the evidence in this case, the parties now propose the following discovery plan: 4 3. Areas of Discovery: (a) the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint and (b) 5 Defendant’s defenses. 6 4. Discovery Plan: The Parties propose the following discovery plan: 7 A. Discovery Cut-off Date(s): The parties agreed to ADR and will be scheduling 8 early evaluation with a private neutral before the end of the year after 9 undertaking some limited discovery. As such, the parties agreed to modify the 10 traditional discovery model of 180 days allowed under Local Rule 26-1(b)(1) 11 and extending the discovery cut-off by ninety (90) days, which accommodates 12 scheduling the above-mentioned. This discovery plan allows for an early 13 evaluation by a neutral and still affords the parties time in discovery should 14 the case not resolve. Under this plan, all discovery must be completed by no 15 later than April 4, 2022. 16 A. Amending Pleadings or Adding Parties: Unless otherwise stated herein or 17 ordered by the Court, the date for filing motions to amend the pleadings or to 18 add parties shall not be later than ninety (90) days prior to the discovery cut- 19 off date. Therefore, any such motion shall be filed not later than January 4, 20 2022. 21 B. Disclosure of Expert Witnesses: In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) 22 and L.R. 26-1(3), disclosures identifying experts shall be made sixty (60) days 23 prior to discovery cut-off date. Therefore, such disclosures shall be made not 2022 later than February 3, 2021. Disclosures identifying rebuttal experts shall be 24 26 made thirty (30) days after the initial disclosure of experts. Therefore, such 2022 disclosures shall be made not later than March 7, 2021. 27 C. Dispositive Motions: Dispositive motions must be filed within thirty (30) days 25 28 Page 2 of 6 1 2 after the close of discovery. Therefore, such motions shall be filed not later 2022 than May 4, 2021. 4 D. Pre-Trial Order: The parties will prepare a Joint Pre-Trial Order on or before 2022 June 3, 2021, which is not more than thirty (30) days after the date set for 5 filing dispositive motions in the case. This deadline will be suspended if 6 dispositive motions are timely filed until thirty (30) days after the decision of 7 the dispositive motions or until further order of the Court. The disclosure 8 required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) and objections thereto, shall be made in 9 the pre-trial order. 3 10 E. Pre-Trial Disclosures: L.R. 26-1(6) requires that pre-trial disclosures, pursuant 11 to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3), and any objections thereto shall be included in the 12 Pre-Trial Order. However, the parties wish to deviate from that rule to permit 13 a reasonable opportunity to evaluate a party’s pre-trial disclosures and make 14 well-reasoned objections thereto. The parties do not feel they can adequately 15 do so under the modified schedule of L.R. 26-1(6). Therefore, the parties 16 propose following the schedule in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3)(B) which requires 17 the parties make pre-trial disclosures not later than thirty (30) days before trial 18 and submit any objections thereto not later than fourteen (14) days before 19 trial. 20 F. Court Conference: If the Court has questions regarding the dates proposed by 21 the parties, the parties request a conference with the Court before entry of the 22 Scheduling Order. If the Court does not have questions, the parties do not 23 request a conference with the Court. 24 5. Other orders that should be entered by the Court under Rule 26(c) or under Rules 25 16(b) and (c): There may be the need for a confidentiality and protective order if Plaintiff 26 makes a request for the disclosure of trade secrets and/or other confidential and protected 27 information by Defendant GEICO during discovery. Absent the agreement on a 28 Page 3 of 6 1 confidentiality order by the parties, Defendant may file a motion for protective order 2 pursuant to Rule 26(c). 3 6. E-discovery: The parties agree that disclosure and discovery of electronically stored 4 information should be produced in Portable Document Format (Adobe Acrobat) (“PDF 5 Format”) to allow for proper and consistent Bates numbering. The PDF documents are 6 also to be produced in a recognize text Optical Character Recognition (“OCR”) format. If 7 in good faith a party questions the authenticity of an electronically stored document, or 8 for other good faith reason, the party may request the PDF format document to be 9 produced in its native format. 10 7. Clawback Agreement: In the event that any Party (the “Discloser”) produces material 11 or documents without intending to waive a claim of privilege or confidentiality, the 12 Discloser does not waive any claim of privilege or confidentiality if, within a reasonable 13 amount of time after the Discloser actually discovers that such material or documents 14 were produced, the Discloser notifies all other Parties (the “Recipient(s)”) of the 15 inadvertent disclosure of privileged or confidential items, identifying the material or 16 documents produced and stating the privilege or confidentiality provision asserted. Mere 17 failure to diligently screen documents before producing them does not waive a claim of 18 privilege or confidentiality. 19 If the Discloser asserts that it inadvertently produced privileged or confidential 20 items in accordance with this Claw Back Agreement, the Recipient(s) must return the 21 specified material or documents and any copies within ten days of the notification. The 22 Recipient(s) must further permanently destroy any electronic copies of such specified 23 material or documents and affirm in writing to counsel for the Discloser of such 24 destruction. 25 In the event that the Recipient(s) contends the documents are not subject to 26 privilege or confidentiality as asserted by the Discloser in accordance with this Claw 27 Back Agreement, the Recipient(s) may, following the return and destruction described in 28 Page 4 of 6 1 Paragraph 2 of this Agreement, challenge the privilege claim through a Motion to 2 Compel or other pleading with the District Court in which the Litigation is currently 3 pending. The Parties agree that any review of items by the judge shall be an in camera 4 review. 5 Should the Recipient(s) not challenge the Discloser’s claim of privilege or 6 confidentiality, or should the presiding judge determine that the documents are in fact 7 subject to privilege or confidentiality, the documents, or information contained therein or 8 derived therefrom, may not be used in the Litigation or against the Discloser in any future 9 litigation or arbitration brought by the Recipient(s). Nothing contained within this Claw 10 Back Agreement shall be deemed to waive any objection that any Party may wish to 11 assert under applicable state or federal law. 12 If the Recipient challenges the privilege or confidentiality of the inadvertently 13 disclosed documents, and prevails on the motion to compel, the Recipient will be entitled 14 to recover reasonable attorney’s fees for bringing the motion, to be determined by the 15 Court. 16 8. Extensions or Modifications of the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order: In 17 accordance with L.R. 26-4, any stipulation or motion for modification or extension of this 18 discovery plan and scheduling order must be made no later than twenty-one (21) days 19 before the discovery cut-off date. Therefore, such stipulations or motions shall be made 20 not later than March 21, 2022. 21 9. Alternative Dispute Resolution: Pursuant to Local Rule 26-1 (b)(7), the parties certify 22 that they met and conferred about the possibility of using alternative dispute-resolution 23 processes including mediation, arbitration and if applicable, early neutral evaluation. 24 10. Alternative Forms of Case Disposition: Pursuant to Local Rule 26-1 (b)(8), the 25 parties certify that they considered consent to trial by a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. 26 § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 and the use of the Short Trial Program (General Order 27 2013-01). 28 Page 5 of 6 1 11. Electronic Evidence: Pursuant to Local Rule 26-1 (b)(9), the parties certify that they 2 agree to provide discovery in an electronic format compatible with the court’s electronic 3 jury evidence display system at trial. 4 5 DATED this_ 2nd 6 ALDRICH LAW FIRM WINNER, BOOZE & ZARCONE /s/ Catherine Hernandez_ John Aldrich Nevada Bar No. 6877 Catherine Hernandez Nevada Bar No. 8410 7866 West Sahara Avenue Las Vegas, Nevada 89117 Attorneys for Plaintiff /s/ Lara L. Miller______________ Thomas E. Winner Nevada Bar No. 5168 Lara L. Miller Nevada Bar No. 12618 1117 South Rancho Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 Attorneys for Defendant 7 8 9 10 11 day of August, 2021. DATED this 2nd day of August, 2021. 12 13 14 15 ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of August, 2021. 16 17 18 _______________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
