Dolce et al v. Liberty Mutual Insurace Company, No. 2:2022cv01434 - Document 21 (D. Nev. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER Granting 20 Motion to Extend Time. Discovery due by 7/31/2023. Motions due by 8/28/2023. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 9/27/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 2/14/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LOE)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dolce et al v. Liberty Mutual Insurace Company Doc. 21 Case 2:22-cv-01434-RFB-NJK Document 21 Filed 02/14/23 Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 NICHOLAS J. BOOS (SBN 16047) nboos@maynardcooper.com MAYNARD COOPER & GALE LLP Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1450 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 646-4700 Facsimile: (205) 254-1999 Attorneys for Defendant LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 6 7 8 9 10 Designation for Service Only: Kristol Bradley Ginapp, (SBN 8468) Holley Driggs 300 S. 4th Street, Suite 1600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 kginapp@nevadafirm.com 13 CHRISTIAN N. GRIFFIN, ESQ. (SBN 10601) HALE INJURY LAW 1661 W. Horizon Ridge Parkway, Suite 200 Henderson, Nevada 89012 Phone: (702) 736-5800 Fax: (701) 534-4655 cgriffin@haleinjurylaw.com 14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 12 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 18 BRIAN DOLCE; et al., Plaintiff, 19 20 21 Case No. 2:22-cv-1434-RFB-NJK v. JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (RENEWED SECOND REQUEST) LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., 22 Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME Pursuant to Rule 16(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 26-3, Defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Defendant”) and Plaintiffs Brian Dolce, et al. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) (collectively, Defendant and Plaintiffs are referred to as “the Parties”), jointly move the Court for an order extending the deadlines set by the Court by 60 days. Docket 06734047.1 JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (RENEWED SECOND REQUEST) Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:22-cv-01434-RFB-NJK Document 21 Filed 02/14/23 Page 2 of 6 1 No. 17. This is the Parties’ renewed second motion to extend the deadlines at issue. Docket Nos. 2 14, 17, 18. In support thereof, the Parties state as follows: MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 3 Though they have engaged in discovery to date, the Parties cannot reasonably meet the 4 5 current deadlines. This case requires the disclosure of sensitive information, obtaining documents 6 from third parties, expert evaluations, and a number of in-person discovery matters. The Parties 7 have been and continue to diligently work through these issues but expert and fact discovery 8 cannot be completed in the currently set timeframe. The Parties respectfully submit that good 9 cause exists to extend the deadlines set by the Court by 60 days. 10 I. LEGAL STANDARDS “A request to extend deadlines in the Court’s scheduling order must be supported by a 11 12 showing of good cause for the extension.” Victor v. Walmart, Inc., No. 220CV01591JCMNJK, 13 2021 WL 3745190, at *2 (D. Nev. Apr. 8, 2021). The “good cause” standard applies under both 14 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) and Local Rule 26-3. Id. at n. 3. “‘Good cause’ is a non- 15 rigorous standard . . . .” Choate v. Nevada Att’y Gen., No. 216CV00813RFBGWF, 2021 WL 16 230048, at *1 (D. Nev. Jan. 22, 2021) (quoting Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 17 1259 (9th Cir. 2010)). “Good cause to extend a discovery deadline exists ‘if it cannot reasonably 18 be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Victor, 2021 WL 3745190, at *2 19 (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992)). “The good 20 cause inquiry focuses primarily on the movant’s diligence.” Fields v. Williams, No. 21 217CV01725JADNJK, 2019 WL 1472100, at *1 (D. Nev. Apr. 3, 2019) (citing Coleman v. 22 Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1294–95 (9th Cir. 2000)); see also Choate, 2021 WL 230048, 23 at *1. 24 Local Rule 26-3 requires that a motion or stipulation to extend deadlines also include: 25 (a) A statement specifying the discovery completed; 26 (b) A specific description of the discovery that remains to be completed; 27 (c) The reasons why the deadline was not satisfied or the remaining discovery was not completed within the time limits set by the discovery plan; and 28 06734047.1 2 JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (RENEWED SECOND REQUEST) Case 2:22-cv-01434-RFB-NJK Document 21 Filed 02/14/23 Page 3 of 6 (d) A proposed schedule for completing all remaining discovery. 1 2 II. ARGUMENT 3 A. 4 The Parties have completed the following discovery: 5 Exchange of written initial disclosures (October 20, 2022); 6 Exchange of documents identified in initial disclosures (more than 3,000 pages of documents) (Plaintiff: October 26, 2022) (Defendant: November 18, 2022); 7 8 Defendant has propounded Interrogatories to each of the four Plaintiffs (November 11, 2022); 11 12 Defendant has propounded Requests for Production to each of the four Plaintiffs (November 11, 2022); 9 10 Discovery Completed Defendant has issued subpoenas to 13 medical providers identified in Plaintiffs’ initial 13 disclosures (November 17, 2022) (Defendant received document production in 14 response to subpoenas on November 30, 2022, December 1, 2022, December 6, 2022, 15 December 7, 2022, December 8, 2022, December 12, 2022, December 13, 2022, 16 December 20, 2022, December 27, 2022, and December 31, 2022). 17 Plaintiffs have responded to Defendant’s discovery requests (December 6, 2022). 18 Defendant has engaged experts. 19 Defendant’s expert has conducted the independent medical examination of Plaintiff Mary Dolce (February 3, 2023). 20 21 B. Discovery That Remains To Be Completed 22 Despite the Parties’ diligence, the remaining items of discovery still need to be completed: 23 Receipt of the totality of subpoenaed medical records (Defendant has responded to 24 inquiries regarding production from subpoenaed parties, including on December 20, 25 2022 and January 3, 2023; 26 Independent medical examinations of Plaintiffs other than Mary Dolce (Defendant 27 communicated with Plaintiff’s counsel regarding scheduling of IMEs for the Plaintiffs 28 on January 6, 2023, January 9, 2023, January 10, 2023, January 12, 2023, January 16, 06734047.1 3 JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (RENEWED SECOND REQUEST) Case 2:22-cv-01434-RFB-NJK Document 21 Filed 02/14/23 Page 4 of 6 2023; January 20, 2023); 1 2 Exchange of expert reports; 3 Depositions of experts; 4 Depositions of Plaintiffs; 5 Depositions of Defendant’s employees and representative(s) (The Parties 6 communicated about such depositions on December 6, 2022, January 6, 2022, and 7 February 3, 2023; 8 9 C. 10 Depositions of Plaintiffs’ medical providers; Reasons An Extension Is Needed Despite the significant discovery that has been conducted—including initial disclosures, 11 document production, written discovery, third party subpoenas, and negotiation of various 12 discovery issues—the Parties respectfully submit that they cannot reasonably conduct the 13 remaining discovery in order meet the current deadlines. “The discovery process in theory should 14 be cooperative and largely unsupervised by the district court.” ProCare Hospice of Nevada, LLC 15 v. OneCare Hospice, LLC, 340 F.R.D. 174, 176 (D. Nev. 2021) (quoting Sali v. Corona Reg. 16 Med. Ctr., 884 F.3d 1218, 1219 (9th Cir. 2018)). The Parties have been negotiating a number of 17 discovery issues to avoid disputes that will render Court action necessary and respectfully submit 18 that these negotiations constitute good cause to briefly extend the deadlines as requested. 19 For example, the Parties have been negotiating an agreeable time for Plaintiffs in this 20 action to have independent medical examinations performed by Defendant’s Expert. Plaintiff 21 Mary Dolce’s independent medical examination has been conducted. However, because Plaintiff 22 Brian Dolce has recently started new employment, he has not been available to be physically 23 examined at a time mutually agreeable for himself and Defendant’s expert. The Parties anticipate 24 that, with an appropriate extension, they can cooperatively schedule and proceed with Mr. 25 Dolce’s independent medical examination. 26 Additionally, the Parties have been attempting to negotiate resolution of a potential 27 dispute regarding the examination of the other two Plaintiffs in this action. Without waiving their 28 rights, the Parties are optimistic that they may potentially reach a stipulation—which they have 06734047.1 4 JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (RENEWED SECOND REQUEST) Case 2:22-cv-01434-RFB-NJK Document 21 Filed 02/14/23 Page 5 of 6 Case 2:22-cv-01434-RFB-NJK Document 21 Filed 02/14/23 Page 6 of 6 1 Dispositive Motion Deadline June 29, 2023 August 28, 2023 2 Pretrial Order Deadline July 29, 2023 September 27, 2023 3 4 III. CONCLUSION 5 For the reasons stated above, the Parties respectfully request the Court enter an order 6 extending the deadlines set by the Scheduling Order (Docket No. 14) by 60 days. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED: 8 9 NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 10 11 February 14, 2023 Dated: __________________ 12 13 14 15 Dated: February 13, 2023 MAYNARD, COOPER & GALE, LLP 16 17 By: 18 19 /s/ Nicholas J. Boos NICHOLAS J. BOOS Attorneys for Defendant LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 20 21 22 Dated: February 13, 2023 HALE INJURY LAW 23 By: 24 /s/ Christian N. Griffin CHRISTIAN N. GRIFFIN Attorneys for Plaintiffs 25 26 27 28 06734047.1 6 JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (RENEWED SECOND REQUEST)
]]>
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.
