American Nutritional Corporation Inc. v. Else Nutrition USA, Inc.

Opinion

1]| John E. Bragonje Nevada Bar No. 9519 2|| LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP 3993 Howard Hughes Pkwy, Suite 600 3|| Las Vegas, NV 89169-5996 Tel: (702) 949-8200 Email: jbragonje@lewisroca.com 5|| Matthew Heerde (pro hac vice) PEARL COHEN ZEDEK LATZER BARATZ LLP 6|| Times Square Tower 7 Times Square 7\| New York, NY 10036 Tel : (646) 878-0856 |} Email: mheerde@pearlcohen.com 9|| Attorneys for Defendant Else Nutrition USA, Inc. 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1] DISTRICT OF NEVADA AMERICAN NUTRITIONAL Case No.: 2:22-cv-01286-APG-EJY CORPORATION, INC., a Nevada > 13 || corporation, Zz 14 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND {PROPOSED} ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN vs. SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND TO a STAY DISCOVERY ELSE NUTRITION USA, INC., a Delaware corporation, 17 Defendant. 18 20 1 Plaintiff American Nutritional Corporation, Inc. and defendant Else 21 ||Nutrition USA, Inc., by and through their respective counsel, hereby respectfully request 22 ||pursuant to Local Rule 16-5 that this Court issue an order requiring the parties and their 23 ||attorneys to be present at a settlement conference at a time and place to be designated by 94 |\the Court for the consideration of the resolution of this action, and such other matters as 25 ||may aid in the resolution, settlement, and disposition of the action. Specifically, the 26 ||parties represent that this case is appropriate for “a pre-discovery early settlement 27 ||conference with a magistrate judge.” LR 1-1(b); see also LR IB 1-7 (describing duties of 28 ||a magistrate judge to include presiding at confidential settlement conferences). 120715156.1

1 2 Under 28 U.S.C. §1332, this Court has diversity jurisdiction because this 2 |/action is between citizens of different states and/or countries and—based on the relief 3 ||requested—the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. See also JPMorgan Chase Bank 4 ||Traffic Stream (BVI) Infrastructure Ltd., 536 U.S. 88, 91 (2002) (Section 1332(a)(2) 5 ||“provides district courts with original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in 6 ||controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000 and is between citizens of a state and 7 ||citizens or subjects of a foreign state.”). 8 3 Defendant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of 9 |/Delaware, with its principal place of business and headquarters (nerve center) located in 10 |New Albany, Ohio. For purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), 11 ||Defendant is a citizen of Delaware and Ohio. However, the principals of Defendant who 12 ||have authority to make decisions pertaining to this lawsuit, including to negotiate a 13. ||/potential resolution of this action, reside neither in Delaware nor Ohio. They are citizens 14 }lof the State of Israel and resident there. 8 15 4 In addition, the Defendant’s lead trial counsel, Matthew Heerde, admitted 16 ||pro hac vice in this matter, also resides in outside Nevada—in New York County, New 17 York. 18 5 Given the logistical difficulty, the tax on time and resources, the continuing 19 |/difficulty and increased cost of international travel, and the desire to conserve resources, 20 |/the parties request that Defendants’ principals and lead trial counsel be permitted to appear 21 |/at the settlement conference through live video transmission, such as Zoom or Microsoft 22 ||Teams. The parties recognize that this will mean that all counsel and party representatives 23 |/will need to appear virtually, and not just those who reside outside this jurisdiction. The 24 |/parties have conducted several informal conferences by this method and are confident that 25 ||doing so in this context would not prejudice the chances for success in any manner. 26 6 We recognize that this Court “is committed to assisting attorneys and 27 ||parties in reducing costs in civil cases” and that it “is the obligation of attorneys, as 28 |jofficers of the court, to work toward the prompt completion of each case and to minimize 120715156.1

] |[litigation expense.” LR 1-1(B); see also 28 U.S.C. § 473(b)(5) (civil justice expense and 2 |\delay reduction plans adopted by district courts may include requirement that 3 |/representatives “with authority to bind [parties] in settlement discussions” be available 4 ||during settlement conferences). With this exhortation from the Court in mind, the parties 5 |/also request that this Court stay the discovery deadlines from now until a period of three 6 ||weeks following the conclusion of the settlement conference (in the event that the case 7 ||does not resolve) during which time the parties will propose a new stipulated scheduling 8 |lorder to address the remaining discovery to be completed. This will permit the parties to 9 |/redirect time and financial resources that they would otherwise expend in the discovery 10 |/process towards potential settlement. 11 IT Is SO STIPULATED.

12 || Dated this 30th day of March, 2023. Dated this 30th day of March, 2023. 13 BRIAN K. BERMAN, CHTD. LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE Zz 14 LLP 6 g 15 || By: /s/ Brian K. Berman By: /s/_ John E. Bragonje 8 Brian K. Berman John E. Bragonje 16 || Nevada Bar No. 56 Nevada Bar No. 9519 7 b.k.berman@att.net 3993 Howard Hughes Pkwy, Suite 600 721 Gass Avenue Las Vegas, NV 89169-5996 18 || Las Vegas, NV 89101 Tel: (702) 949-8200 (702) 382-0702 Email: jbragonje@lewisroca.com 19 Attorney for Plaintiff American PEARL COHEN ZEDEK LATZER 20 | Nutritional Corporation, Inc. BARATZ LLP 21 Matthew Heerde (pro hac vice) 22 Times Square Tower 7 Times Square 23 New York, NY 10036 Tel : (646) 878-0856 24 Email: mheerde@pearlcohen.com 25 Attorneys for Defendant Else Nutrition USA, 26 Inc 27 28 120715156.1

2 Good cause appearing, IT Is □□ ORDERED. All attendees of the settlement 3 ||conference will appear via video conference, the details of which the Court will provide in 4 ||a separate scheduling order. 5 6 . 7 UNTIED STATES/MAGISTRATE JUDGE Dated: March 31, 2023 10 1] 12 S > 13 > = 14 15 § 16 17 18 19 20 21

23 24 25 26 27 28 120715156.1