Opinion
2:17-cv-00085-JAD-VCF
08-24-2022
MARK HUNT, an individual, Plaintiff, v. ZUFFA, LLC d/b/a ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP, a Nevada limited liability company; BROCK LESNAR, an individual; DANA WHITE, an individual, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants.
CHRISTINA DENNING, ESQ. (CA Bar No. 211137) DENNING MOORES, APC BRIAN W. BOSCHEE, ESQ. (NV Bar No. 7612) JESSICA M. LUJAN, ESQ. (NV Bar No. 14913) HOLLEY DRIGGS Brian W. Boschee, Esq. (NBN 7612) Jessica M. Lujan, Esq. (NBN 14913) And Christina Denning, Esq. DENNING MOORES, APC Attorneys for Plaintiff Mark Hunt CAMPBELL & WILLIAMS J. Colby Williams, Esq. (NBN 5549) Donald J. Campbell, Esq. (NBN 1216) Philip R. Erwin, Esq. (NBN 11563) Attorneys for Defendants Zuffa, LLC and Dana White CHRISTIANSEN TRIAL LAWYERS Peter S. Christiansen, Esq. (NBN 5254) Kendelee L. Works (NBN 9611) And David Olsen, Esq. (pro hac vice) HENSON & EFRON, P.A. Attorneys for Defendant Brock Lesnar
CHRISTINA DENNING, ESQ. (CA Bar No. 211137) DENNING MOORES, APC BRIAN W. BOSCHEE, ESQ. (NV Bar No. 7612) JESSICA M. LUJAN, ESQ. (NV Bar No. 14913)
HOLLEY DRIGGS Brian W. Boschee, Esq. (NBN 7612) Jessica M. Lujan, Esq. (NBN 14913) And Christina Denning, Esq. DENNING MOORES, APC Attorneys for Plaintiff Mark Hunt
CAMPBELL & WILLIAMS J. Colby Williams, Esq. (NBN 5549) Donald J. Campbell, Esq. (NBN 1216) Philip R. Erwin, Esq. (NBN 11563) Attorneys for Defendants Zuffa, LLC and Dana White
CHRISTIANSEN TRIAL LAWYERS Peter S. Christiansen, Esq. (NBN 5254) Kendelee L. Works (NBN 9611) And David Olsen, Esq. (pro hac vice) HENSON & EFRON, P.A. Attorneys for Defendant Brock Lesnar
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES FIRST REQUEST
This is the parties' first request for an extension of the deadlines set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order entered post-remand (ECF No. 215).
Pursuant to LR IA 6-1, LR IA 6-2, LR II 7-1, and LR II 26-3, Plaintiff Mark Hunt (“Plaintiff”), by and through his undersigned counsel, Defendant Brock Lesnar (“Lesnar”), by and through his undersigned counsel, and Defendants Zuffa, LLC (“UFC”) and Dana White (“White”), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate, contingent upon this Court's approval to extend the remaining discovery deadlines set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order (ECF No. 215). This is the parties' first request to extend the subject deadlines.
A. The Discovery Completed to Dated:
In addition to the voluminous written discovery that the parties exchanged and responded to prior to the appeal, the parties have completed the following further discovery post-remand:
| Date | Discovery Event |
| 3/18/2022 | UFC served a subpoena for documents to non-party USADA |
| 3/23/2022 | Lesnar served Interrogatories, Requests for Production, and Requests for Admission on Plaintiff |
| 5/20/2022 | Plaintiff responded to Lesnar's Interrogatories, Requests for Production, and Requests for Admission |
| 7/6/2022 | Plaintiff served a subpoena for documents to non-party USADA |
| 7/15/2022 | The parties disclosed their Initial Designation of Expert Witnesses |
| 8/4/2022 | Plaintiff served Requests for Production to UFC (responses not yet due) |
| 8/15/2022 | Plaintiff disclosed his Initial Expert Reports |
| 8/16/2022 | UFC noticed Plaintiff's deposition (September 16, 2022) |
| 8/18/2022 | Parties confirmed deposition dates for White and non-party Jeff Novitzky (10/27- 28, Notices forthcoming) |
In addition to the above events, the parties have engaged at length regarding counsel's and the parties' availability for depositions, as well as the depositions of certain additional non-parties. Given various scheduling conflicts amongst counsel and the parties (and non-parties), as well as the parties' ongoing disagreement regarding the propriety of certain non-party depositions, the parties anticipate the need for an extension of the discovery deadline to accommodate the remaining depositions that remain outstanding. This includes the depositions of Defendant White and non-party Jeff Novitzsky, which depositions are already scheduled to take place after the current close of discovery by necessity of the parties' and counsel's respective availability.
B. The Discovery that Remains to be Completed:
Discovery that remains to be completed includes the depositions of each of the parties and certain non-party percipient witnesses. Additional written discovery may also be appropriate.
C. The Reasons Why Specified Discovery Has Yet to Be Completed:
As stated above, the parties have had difficulty identifying dates, times, and locations that work for all of the parties (and non-parties) and their counsel to take depositions in this matter. This difficulty is exacerbated by Plaintiffs residence in Australia, and by each of the parties' uniquely busy travel and work schedules. However, the parties have already begun to identify dates that are workable and issued Notices of Deposition accordingly. As such, the parties are requesting an extension of the discovery deadline sufficient to accommodate the various depositions sought by the parties.
D. A Proposed Schedule for Completing All Remaining Discovery:
By this stipulation, the parties agree and request a sixty-day extension of the following deadlines (adjusted as necessary for holidays or weekends) set forth in the Scheduling Order (ECF No. 215):
| Discovery Event | Current Deadline | Extended Deadline |
| Amending Pleadings / Adding Parties | July 18, 2022 | No change |
| Discovery Completion | October 14, 2022 | December 13, 2022 |
| Initial Disclosure of Experts | July 15, 2022 | No change |
| Initial Disclosure of Expert Reports | August 15, 2022 | No change |
| Rebuttal Expert Opinions | September 14, 2022 | No change |
| Dispositive Motions | November 14, 2022 | January 13, 2023 |
| Pre-Trial Order | December 14, 2022 | February 13, 2023 |
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
E Good Cause
Pursuant to LR IA 6-1(a) and LR II 26-3, good cause exists to extend the deadlines under the Scheduling Order, as the parties have been diligently cooperating to identify dates and locations for the various depositions that must be taken in this matter. Despite various scheduling conflicts amongst counsel and the parties alike, the parties have begun to select firm dates for certain depositions and request the instant extension to accommodate those dates.
IT IS SO AGREED AND STIPULATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 and the Court's Local Rules, I hereby certify that on August 24th, 2022, a copy of the foregoing document titled STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES (FIRST REQUEST) was efiled/emailed to all parties and their counsel