Opinion
2:22-CV-00365-ART-DJA
12-09-2022
VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability company, DVH HOSPITAL ALLIANCE, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability company, and SUMMERLIN HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability company, Plaintiffs, v. TRAVEL INSURANCE FACILITIES, PLC, a Foreign Corporation, UNION REISEVERSICHERUNG AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, a Foreign Corporation, Defendants.
MCDONALD CARANO, PAT LUNDVALL, ESQ., DANIEL AQUINO, ESQ. Attorneys for Defendant URV WILEY PETERSEN, JASON M. WILEY, ESQ., RYAN S. PETERSEN, ESQ., Timothy M. Hartley, Esq., HARTLEY LAW OFFICES, PLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MCDONALD CARANO, PAT LUNDVALL, ESQ., DANIEL AQUINO, ESQ. Attorneys for Defendant URV
WILEY PETERSEN, JASON M. WILEY, ESQ., RYAN S. PETERSEN, ESQ., Timothy M. Hartley, Esq., HARTLEY LAW OFFICES, PLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT UNION REISEVERSICHERUNG AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT [SIXTH REQUEST]
ANNE R. TRAUM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM, LLC; DVH HOSPITAL ALLIANCE, LLC, and SUMMERLIN HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER, LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) by and through their counsel of record, Timothy M. Hartley, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice) of the Hartley Law Offices and Jason M. Wiley, Esq. of the law firm Wiley Petersen and Defendant UNION REISERVERSICHERUNG AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT (“URV”) by and through its counsel of record, Pat Lundvall, Esq. and Daniel Aquino, Esq. of the law firm McDonald Carano to extend the time for Plaintiffs to file a response to Defendant Union Reiseversicherung Aktiengesellschaft's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, For a More Definite Statement (“Motion”). ECF No. 24. The Motion was filed on June 30, 2022, and no hearing date has been scheduled. The parties respectfully request the Court enter an order extending Plaintiffs' response to the Motion to March 10, 2023.
The parties offer the following reasons for the requested extension:
1. On June 30, 2022, URV filed its Motion.
2. In order to fully and adequately respond to URV's Motion, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Leave to Conduct Limited Jurisdictional Discovery (“Jurisdictional Discovery Motion”). ECF No. 25. On July 15, 2022, the Court denied the Jurisdictional Discovery Motion without prejudice, pending satisfaction of the meet and confer requirement under Local Rule IA 1-3(f). ECF No. 27.
3. Defendant TRAVEL INSURANCE FACILITIES, PLC (“TIF”), has yet to be served with the Summons and Complaint through international service procedures pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4.
4. It is anticipated that, once service does occur, TIF will assert similar argument as advanced by URV in its Motion.
5. During the extension period, the parties will utilize the time to (a) determine whether TIF has been served; (b) discuss how the Jurisdictional Discovery Motion to be refiled by Plaintiffs affects the Motion; and (c) formulate a plan regarding the Motion, Jurisdictional Discovery Motion, and other related matters.
6. Subsequent to the filing the Stipulation and Order to Extend Time for Plaintiffs to File Response to Defendant Union Reiseversicherung Aktiengesellschaft's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, For a More Definite Statement [First Request] (“First Request”) [ECF No. 26], the parties have engaged in preliminary settlement discussions and have tentatively agreed to meet to discuss resolution of all claims and causes of action alleged.
7. The Court granted the First Request [ECF No. 28] setting July 22, 2022, as Plaintiffs' response date to the Motion.
8. The Court then granted the Second Request [ECF No. 30] setting August 12, 2022 as Plaintiff's response date to the Motion.
9. The Court then granted the Third Request [ECF No. 33] setting September 11, 2022 as Plaintiff's response date to the Motion.
10. The Court then granted the Fourth Request [ECF No. 36] setting October 11, 2022 as Plaintiff's response date to the Motion.
11. The Court then granted the Fifth Request [ECF No. 39] setting December 10, 2022 as Plaintiff's response date to the Motion.
12. It is anticipated that the parties will conduct a meeting/conference prior to the requested extension deadline date of March 10, 2023, and have undertaken a discussion as to the status of service on TIF as well as URV's position towards Plaintiff's request for jurisdictional discovery.
13. The requested extension will not unduly prejudice any party to the litigation.
14. The stipulation is made in good faith, not for purposes of delay, and will not cause undue harassment or delay.
[Parties signatures on following page]
IT IS SO ORDERED.