Del Rivero v. Albertson's, LLC

Full title: FRANCISCO PEREZ DEL RIVERO, individually, Plaintiff, v. ALBERTSON'S LLC…

Court: United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Feb 6, 2023

2:21-cv-02111-CDS-BNW (D. Nev. Feb. 6, 2023)

Opinion

2:21-cv-02111-CDS-BNW

02-06-2023

FRANCISCO PEREZ DEL RIVERO, individually, Plaintiff, v. ALBERTSON'S LLC d/b/a ALBERTSONS a limited liability company; DOES I-X; and ROE CORPORATIONS I-X, inclusive; Defendants.

Jack P. Burden, Esq. Jacquelyn Franco, Esq. Nevada State Bar No. 13484 Backus | Burden Attorneys for Defendant, Albertson's LLC

BRENDA WEKSLER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Jack P. Burden, Esq.

Jacquelyn Franco, Esq.

Nevada State Bar No. 13484

Backus | Burden Attorneys for Defendant, Albertson's LLC

REVISED STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE FOR PROPOSED JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER FOR 60 DAYS

BRENDA WEKSLER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff FRANCISCO PEREZ DEL RIVERO (“Plaintiff”), by and through his attorney of record, Joshua L. Benson, Esq. of the law firm Benson Allred, and Defendant ALBERTSON'S LLC (“Defendant”), by and through its attorneys of record, Jack P. Burden, Esq. and Jacquelyn Franco, Esq. of the law firm of BACKUS | BURDEN, hereby stipulate and agree to an extension of the deadline to file Proposed Joint Pretrial Order by sixty (60) days.

The Proposed Joint Pretrial Order is currently due to the Court by January 26, 2023. The Parties are trying to schedule a Judicial Settlement Conference in hopes of globally resolving the case, or at a minimum, determine which claims and/or defenses will be viable at trial; therefore, impacting the anticipated length of same.

Pursuant to LR IA 6-1(b), the Parties hereby aver that this is the first extension requested as it relates to the Joint Pretrial Order. Moreover, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, it is respectfully submitted the Parties' failure to request the instant extension prior to the filing deadline was the result of excusable neglect; specifically noting the failure to request the extension of was a mere oversight by the Parties. Bateman v. U.S. Postal Service, 231 F.3d 1220 (9^th Cir. 2000). Further: 1) there is no danger of prejudice as the extension is stipulated by the Parties; 2) a sixty (60) day extension will not impact a trial date because the same has not been scheduled; 3) the Parties are hopeful to attend a settlement conference within the requested extended-period; and 4) the requested extension is made in good faith by both Parties. Pioneer Investment Services v. Brunswick Associate's, Ltd., 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993).

As such, the Parties stipulate and agree to jointly ask the Court to extend the deadline to submit the Proposed Joint Pretrial Order by 60 days to March 27, 2023.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED