Opinion
Civil Action 2:20-cv-01470-CDS-VCF
02-08-2023
IMAGEKEEPER LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff, v. WRIGHT NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Defendant.
Dominica C. Anderson Terry W. Ahearn D. Stuart Bartow Daniel B. Heidtke Jordana A. Garellek Nelson Stewart Brianna M. Vinci Glenn F. Meier Bethany L. Rabe H. Stan Johnson, Esq. Donald L. Prunty Steven B. Cohen, Esq. Glenn F. Meier COHEN JOHNSON LLC GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP Colby B. Springer, Esq. F. Christopher Austin Miya Yusa, Esq. WEIDE & MILLER, LTD. POLSINELLI LLP
Dominica C. Anderson
Terry W. Ahearn
D. Stuart Bartow
Daniel B. Heidtke
Jordana A. Garellek
Nelson Stewart
Brianna M. Vinci
Glenn F. Meier
Bethany L. Rabe
H. Stan Johnson, Esq.
Donald L. Prunty
Steven B. Cohen, Esq.
Glenn F. Meier
COHEN JOHNSON LLC
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
Colby B. Springer, Esq.
F. Christopher Austin
Miya Yusa, Esq.
WEIDE & MILLER, LTD.
POLSINELLI LLP
DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER
(Fifth Request)
CAM FERENBACH, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to Civil Local Rules IA 6-1 and 6-2, Defendants Wright National Flood Insurance Services, LLC (“Wright Flood”) and Evoke Technologies, LLC (“Evoke”) respectfully request to amend the Scheduling Order (ECF. No. 249) in this matter for the limited purpose of filing dispositive motions. Plaintiff ImageKeeper, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “ImageKeeper”) takes no position on Defendants' request.
Under the current schedule, dispositive motions are due on February 24, 2022. (ECF No. 249). Both Wright Flood and Evoke intend to file dispositive motions. Wright Flood previously filed an early motion for summary judgment that is pending before the Court. (ECF No. 218). Aside from dispositive motions, the parties have completed discovery in accordance with the current schedule (ECF No. 249). Defendants' request is necessitated by several scheduling conflicts that have materialized since the Court's October 20, 2022 amended Scheduling Order (ECF No. 249). Wright Flood's request is necessitated by a hearing in another matter that was rescheduled by the court in that other matter. Evoke's request is necessitated by an upcoming trial in another matter which was recently set by the court in that matter.
Because Wright Flood and Evoke intend to file further dispositive motions, in addition to Wright Flood's already pending early motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 218), no deadline for filing the joint pretrial order is, or will be, scheduled until 30 days after the Court's decision on the dispositive motions or by further Court order pursuant to Local Rule 26-1(b)(5). Thus, the requested amendment to the current Scheduling Order (ECF No. 249) will not affect any other deadlines or hearing dates in this action.
The Parties have previously requested an amendment to the scheduling order on March 15, 2021. The Court entered the Scheduling Order on March 16, 2021 (ECF. No. 141 at 15). The Court modified the scheduling order on October 12, 2021 (ECF. No. 175). The Parties requested another amendment to the scheduling order on December 1, 2021. The Court entered the amended Scheduling Order on December 3, 2021 (ECF. No. 186). The Parties requested another amendment to the Scheduling Order on February 25, 2022 (ECF. No. 198). The Court entered the amended Scheduling Order on March 1, 2022 (ECF. No. 199). The Parties requested another amendment to the Scheduling Order on August 29, 2022 due to a medical emergency of one of the retained experts (ECF No. 247).
The Court entered the amended, and current, Scheduling Order on October 20, 2022 (ECF No. 249; see also ECF No. 248).
WHEREFORE, the undersigned respectfully requests that the Court approve the present request to amend the Scheduling Order as follows:
ACTION ITEM
OLD DEADLINE (ECF NO. 249)
NEW DEADLINE REQUESTED
Dispositive Motions LR 26-1(b)(4)
February 24, 2023
The Court's decision on dispositive motions will then trigger the setting of a new pre-trial conference order in accordance with the local rules.
Joint Pretrial Order April 23, 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.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
PROOF OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I am a citizen of the United States and am employed in Clark County, where this mailing occurs. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within entitled action; my business address is 2475 Hanover Street, Palo Alto, CA 93404.
On February 6, 2023, I served the document described as DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER on the interested party(ies) in this action:
[ ] BY MAIL: I am “readily familiar” with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Las Vegas, Nevada, in the ordinary course of business.
[ ] BY FEDERAL EXPRESS: I served said document(s) to be delivered on the same day to a courier or driver authorized by Federal Express to receive documents, in an envelope or package designated by Federal Express.
[X] BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: I served a true copy, with all exhibits, electronically on designated recipients via electronic transmission of said document(s) as provided under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.