Opinion
2:22-CV-01863-GMN-BNW
08-07-2023
INTERNATIONAL MARKETS LIVE INC., a New York corporation dba IM MASTERY ACADEMY, Plaintiff, v. DAVID IMONITIE an individual; SPELA SLUGA, an individual; DEVON ROESER, an individual; IVAN TAPIA, an individual; NVISIONU, INC., a Delaware corporation; ILYKIT, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, LUCAS LONGMIRE, an individual; NATHAN SAMUEL, an individual; MICHAEL ZHOR, an individual; IMRAN RICHIE, an individual; JUSTIN OWENS, an individual; PAULO CAVALLERI, an individual; JOSE MIGUEL CONTREAS, an individual; BASS GRANT, an individual; ANGELA CRUIKSHANK, an individual; JEFF CRUIKSHANK, an individual; VINCE MURPHY, an individual; GARY MCSWEEN, an individual; KATRINA WORGESS, an individual; LUIS RONALDO HARNANDEZ ARRIAGA, an individual; STEPHANIA AYO, an individual; SILVIA AYO, an individual; CATALINA VASQUEZ, an individual; MATHIAS VASQUEZ, an individual; DOES 1 through 10, inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X, inclusive, Defendants. AND ALL RELATED MATTERS
Bradley S. Slighting, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10225 SLIGHTING LAW Justin L. James, Esq. Pro Hac Vice Utah Bar No. 15167 JAMES DODGE RUSSELL & STEPHENS PC Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant Ivan Tapia and Defendants Angela Cruikshank, Jeff Cruikshank, and Justin Owens HOLLAND & HART LLP Lars K. Evensen, Esq. Jenapher Lin, Esq. KERR SIMPSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. Sterling Kerr, Esq. George E. Robinson, Esq Attorneys for International Markets Live, Inc. and Christopher Terry
Bradley S. Slighting, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 10225
SLIGHTING LAW
Justin L. James, Esq.
Pro Hac Vice
Utah Bar No. 15167
JAMES DODGE RUSSELL & STEPHENS PC
Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant Ivan Tapia and Defendants Angela Cruikshank, Jeff Cruikshank, and Justin Owens
HOLLAND & HART LLP
Lars K. Evensen, Esq.
Jenapher Lin, Esq.
KERR SIMPSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW
P. Sterling Kerr, Esq.
George E. Robinson, Esq
Attorneys for International Markets Live, Inc. and Christopher Terry
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING OF REPLY TO RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER (ECF NO. 233) (SECOND REQUEST)
Defendant/Counterclaimant Ivan Tapia (“Tapia”), along with Defendant/Counterclaimant David Imonitie and Defendants Spela Sluga, Devon Roeser and NVisionU, Inc. (collectively, the “Joint Defendants”), and Plaintiff/Counterdefendant International Markets Live Inc. (“IML”), (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, the law firms of Slighting Law, James Dodge Russell & Stephens PC, Wellman & Warren LLP, Kerr Simpson Attorneys at Law, and Holland & Hart LLP, hereby stipulate and agree to: 1) extend the deadline for Joint Defendants to file their Reply to IML's Response to Defendants' Joint Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 233) from August 4, 2023 to August 11, 2023 . This is the second stipulation to extend the Reply deadline. The Parties hereby specifically agree and stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2023, Joint Defendants filed their Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 222).
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2023, IML filed its Response to Defendants' Joint Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 233), thereby making Joint Defendants' Reply to IML's Response currently due July 27, 2023.
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2023, counsel for the Parties met and conferred via text message and agreed to allow Joint Defendants an additional eight (8) days to file their Reply to IML's Response, thereby extending the deadline for their Reply from July 27, 2023 to August 4, 2023.
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2023, based upon the July 26, 2023 stipulation of the Parties, the Court entered its Order extending the deadline for the Joint Defendants to file their Reply from July 27, 2023 to August 4, 2023 (ECF No. 239).
WHEREAS, on August 3, 2023, counsel for the Parties met and conferred via text message and agreed to allow Joint Defendants an additional seven (7) days to file their Reply to IML's Response, thereby extending the deadline for the Joint Defendants to file their Reply from August 4, 2023 to August 11, 2023.
WHEREAS, no parties oppose the extension of time for the filing of Joint Defendants' Reply to IML's Response as set forth herein.
THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree to extend the deadline for Joint Defendants to file their Reply to IML's Response to Defendants' Joint Motion for Protective Order from August, 4, 2023 to August 11, 2023 and respectfully request that the Court approve and order the same.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.