From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

T1 Payments LLC v. New U Life Corp.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 6, 2022
2:19-cv-01816-ART-DJA (D. Nev. Dec. 6, 2022)

Opinion

2:19-cv-01816-ART-DJA

12-06-2022

T1 PAYMENTS LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. NEW U LIFE CORPORATION, a California corporation, Defendant. NEW U LIFE CORPORATION, a California corporation, Counterclaimant, v. T1 PAYMENTS LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, et al., Counterclaim-Defendants.

MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT LLP Nathan D. O'Malley (Pro Hac Vice) Daniel Taylor (Pro Hac Vice) Giorgio A. Sassine (Pro Hac Vice) GIBBS GIDEN LOCHER TURNER & SENET Richard Edward Haskin (Nevada Bar No. 11592) Steven Mack (Nevada Bar No. 4000) Attorneys for PAYVISION B.V., a Netherlands limited liability company BROWN BROWN & PREMSRIRUT Puoy K. Premsrirut ROME & ASSOCIATES, A.P.C. Brianna Dahlberg (Pro Hac Vice) Eugene Rome (Pro Hac Vice) Attorneys for New U Life Corporation


MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT LLP

Nathan D. O'Malley (Pro Hac Vice)

Daniel Taylor (Pro Hac Vice)

Giorgio A. Sassine (Pro Hac Vice)

GIBBS GIDEN LOCHER TURNER & SENET

Richard Edward Haskin (Nevada Bar No. 11592)

Steven Mack (Nevada Bar No. 4000)

Attorneys for PAYVISION B.V., a Netherlands limited liability company

BROWN BROWN & PREMSRIRUT

Puoy K. Premsrirut

ROME & ASSOCIATES, A.P.C.

Brianna Dahlberg (Pro Hac Vice)

Eugene Rome (Pro Hac Vice)

Attorneys for New U Life Corporation

ORDER APPROVING

JOINT MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

ANNE R. TRAUM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between all interested parties to this stipulation, Plaintiff NEW U LIFE CORPORATION (“New U Life”), by and through its counsel, the law firms of Rome & Associates and Brown Brown & Premsrirut, and BY SPECIAL APPEARANCE ONLY, Defendant PAYVISION B.V. (“Payvision B.V.”), by and through its counsel, the law firms of Gibbs Giden Locher Turner Senet & Wittbrodt and Musick, Peeler & Garrett LLP (collectively, the “Parties”), stipulate and agree as follows:

1. On May 12, 2022, New U Life filed a Second Amended Counterclaim inter alia against Payvision B.V.

2. On June 13, 2022, Payvision B.V. filed a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Counterclaim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules 12(b)(2), 12(b)(6), and 9(b) (the “Motion to Dismiss”).

3. On July 18, 2022, New U Life filed an Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss.

4. On August 1, 2022, Payvision B.V. filed a Reply to New U Life's Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss.

5. On August 19, 2022, New U Life filed a Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Response to Payvision B.V.'s Reply to New U Life's Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply”).

6. On September 2, 2022, Payvision B.V. filed an Opposition to the Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply.

7. On September 9, 2022, New U Life filed a Reply to Payvision B.V.'s Opposition to the Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply.

8. The Court has not yet ruled on the Motion to Dismiss or the Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply.

9. On November 18, 2022, Payvision B.V. and New U Life reached a tentative settlement.

10. To allow Payvision B.V. and New U Life time to negotiate the terms of the settlement agreement and to not jeopardize the settlement, on November 21, 2022, the Parties agreed that the Court should stay the proceedings as it relates to the Motion to Dismiss and the Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply for fourteen days, i.e., to December 5, 2022.

11. On November 21, 2022, the Parties filed the foregoing stipulation and a proposed order to the Court [Dkt. No. 292].

12. On November 23, 2022, the Court granted the Parties' stipulation and ordered that the proceedings on the Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply shall be stayed until December 5, 2022.

13. To provide the Parties with additional time to negotiate the terms of the settlement and to not jeopardize the settlement, on December 5, 2022, the Parties agreed that the Court should further stay the proceedings as it relates to the Motion to Dismiss and the Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply for seven days, i.e., to December 12, 2022.

14. The Parties submit that good cause exists to warrant the agreed to stipulation.

ORDER

Based on the foregoing, IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

T1 Payments LLC v. New U Life Corp.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 6, 2022
2:19-cv-01816-ART-DJA (D. Nev. Dec. 6, 2022)
Case details for

T1 Payments LLC v. New U Life Corp.

Case Details

Full title:T1 PAYMENTS LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. NEW U…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Dec 6, 2022

Citations

2:19-cv-01816-ART-DJA (D. Nev. Dec. 6, 2022)