From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kennedy v. R.M.L.V., LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Nov 29, 2012
No. 2:12-CV-1134-GMN (D. Nev. Nov. 29, 2012)

Opinion

No. 2:12-CV-1134-GMN

11-29-2012

JENNIFER KENNEDY, an individual, CHRIS GORDON, an individual, LUIS PONCE, an individual, JESSICA STICKEN, an individual, RAY GROH, an individual, RICARDO PARSONS, an individual, ED POLLICK, an individual, HEATHER SCHNEIBERG, an individual, JON STARK, an individual, ROBERT THOMAS, an individual, VAIVA YOUNG, an individual, STEVEN JULIUS MILLER, an individual, and on BEHALF OF OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiffs, v. R.M.L. v. , LLC, a domestic limited-liability company; Individually; DOES I through X, inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X, inclusive, Defendants.

FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. Janice Procter-Murphy (NV Bar No. 10960) Kevin M. Green (NV Bar No. 12384) Attorneys for Defendant R.M.L.V., LLC


FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C.
Janice Procter-Murphy (NV Bar No. 10960)
Kevin M. Green (NV Bar No. 12384)
Attorneys for Defendant
R.M.L.V., LLC

RMLV, LLC'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO

EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR RMLV,

LLC TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS'

MOTION FOR NOTICE OF THE

PENDENCY OF THIS ACTION,

CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION AND

FOR OTHER RELIEF (DOC. 21)


(First Request)

Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 6-2 of the Local Rules of Civil Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, defendant RMLV, LLC ("RMLV") requests that the Court grant a one-week extension for RMLV to respond to Plaintiffs' Motion for Notice of the Pendency of this Action, Conditional Certification, and for Other Relief (the "Motion" (Doc. 21)). RMLV's opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion currently is due on December 6, 2012. Based on the extraordinary circumstances set forth below, RMLV respectfully requests that the Court enter an order extending RMLV's deadline to respond to Plaintiffs' Motion until December 13, 2012.

On the morning of November 28, 2012, counsel for RMLV contacted Plaintiffs' counsel concerning RMLV's request for a one-week extension. See Declaration of Kevin M. Green, attached as Exhibit 1, ¶ 3. Plaintiffs' counsel does not oppose the requested extension. Id.

Extraordinary circumstances warrant this one-week extension. Plaintiffs' Motion raises important issues that concern the scope of this litigation, including whether this matter should proceed as a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and what particular groups employees should receive notice of the opt-in action.

Plaintiffs' Motion was filed the holiday week of Thanksgiving. The offices of RMLV's counsel were closed beginning mid-afternoon of Wednesday, November 21 through the following Monday morning. RMLV's undersigned counsel also have substantial prior work commitments this week and continuing through the first week of December including, among other things, a two-day deposition of a plaintiff, out of state, in another matter which cannot be rescheduled. Due to their prior work commitments, the Thanksgiving holiday, and the fact that preparation of RMLV's opposition to the Motion will require a substantial amount of time, RMLV's counsel request a brief extension of one additional week to prepare RMLV's opposition.

Finally, RMLV's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8) is currently awaiting a ruling from the Court. Magistrate Judge Foley has partially stayed discovery in this case pending resolution of RMLV's Motion to Dismiss and has not entered any discovery, dispositive motion, or other deadlines pending resolution of that motion. See Order (Doc. 18). Instead, Magistrate Judge Foley has ordered the parties to file an amended discovery plan within 10 days after a decision on RMLV's Motion to Dismiss is rendered. See id. Under these unique circumstances, granting RMLV's requested extension will not alter any other deadlines in this case.

For the foregoing reasons, RMLV respectfully requests that the Court grant a one-week extension for RMLV to respond to Plaintiffs' Motion, extending the deadline from December 6, 2012 to December 13, 2012.

FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C.

By __________

Janice Procter-Murphy

Kevin M. Green

Attorneys for Defendant

R.M.L.V., LLC

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on November 28, 2011, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF system for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: PARKER | SCHEER LAGOMARSINO
ANDRE M. LAGOMARSINO, ESQ.
JACOB G. LEAVITT, ESQ.
9555 South Eastern Avenue, Suite 210
Las Vegas, Nevada 89123
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

By __________

An Employee of Fennemore Craig, P.C.


Summaries of

Kennedy v. R.M.L.V., LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Nov 29, 2012
No. 2:12-CV-1134-GMN (D. Nev. Nov. 29, 2012)
Case details for

Kennedy v. R.M.L.V., LLC

Case Details

Full title:JENNIFER KENNEDY, an individual, CHRIS GORDON, an individual, LUIS PONCE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Nov 29, 2012

Citations

No. 2:12-CV-1134-GMN (D. Nev. Nov. 29, 2012)