Bilzerian v. Ignite International Brands, LTD.

Opinion

GARMAN TURNER GORDON LLP ERIC R. OLSEN Nevada Bar No. 3127 ERIKA PIKE TURNER Nevada Bar No. 6454 STEVEN E. KISH III Nevada Bar No. 15257 7251 Amigo Street, Suite 210 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Tel: (725) 777-3000 Fax: (725) 777-3112 Email: eolsen@gtg.legal eturner@gtg.legal skish@gtg.legal Attorneys for Defendants Ignite International, Ltd., Scott Rohleder, and Ignite International Brands, Ltd. || DAN BRANDON BILZERIAN, an individual, | CASE NO.: 2:24-cv-02101-RFB-NJK Plaintiff, V. ORDER TO EXTEND IGNITE IGNITE INTERNATIONAL BRANDS, INTERNATIONAL BRANDS. LTD.’S LTD., a Foreign Corporation; IGNITE DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO INTERNATIONAL, LTD., Foreign PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT Corporation, PAUL BILZERIAN, an individual; SCOTT ROHLEDER, an (FIRST REQUEST) individual; RUPY DHADWAR, an individual, Defendants. Pursuant to Local Rules, Plaintiff, DAN BRANDON BILZERIAN (‘Plaintiff’), and Defendant, IGNITE INTERNATIONAL BRANDS, LTD. (‘Ignite Brands” or “Defendant”, together with Plaintiff the “Parties”), through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: Ignite shall have until April 24, 2025 to file their responsive pleadings to □□□□□□□□□□□ Complaint.' 7 Ges □ Based on the initial Stipulation [ECF 44] lodged on April 15, 2025, Ignite Brands filed a Motion to Dismiss [ECF 47], on April 16, 2025.

1 of 3

As required by LR IA 6-1, Defendant’s counsel states that the failure to file the stipulation to extend before the deadline was the result the attorney’s excusable neglect, and says: 1) there is no danger of prejudice to the Plaintiff, especially in light of pending motions to dismiss by all other Defendants; 2) there is no impact due to a seven day delay between the deadline and the filing; 3) the reason for the delay was counsel’s misapprehension that the only attempted service on the Canadian company had been disputed the service in Texas until Plaintiff's counsel confirmed on April 10, 2025, re-service occurred in Canada on March 18, 2025 (making the responsive pleading due April 8") and agreed to an extension until April 24,2025 (although Plaintiffs counsel would not return to his office on April 14, 2025), and both counsel agreed to the stipulation to extend on April 14"", which Defendant’s counsel lodged with the Court on April 15, 2025; 4) Defendant acted in good faith and without any intent to delay.” Plaintiff takes no position on excusable neglect and expressly reserves all rights, remedies, defenses, objections, and legal arguments. Plaintiff also contends that service in Texas was valid; however, out of abundance of caution, he decided to re-serve the Defendant in Canada. vee ... ... ... ... ... vee ... ... ... vee ... ? See, Briones v. Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116 F.3d 379, 381 (9th Cir. 1997).

9% of 3

This is the Parties’ first request for extension of time this deadline, and it is not intended to cause any delay or prejudice to any party. Dated this 18"* day of April 2025. Dated this 18" day of April 2025. GARMAN TURNER GORDON LLP THE MEDRALA LAW FIRM, PROF. LLC /s/ Eric R. Olsen [s/ Jakub P. Medrala Nevada Bar No. 3127 Nevada Bar No. 12822 ERIKA PIKE TURNER 615 S. 6th Street Nevada Bar No. 6454 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 STEVEN E. KISH II Attorneys for Plaintiff Nevada Bar No. 15257 7251 Amigo Street, Suite 210 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Attorneys for Defendants Ignite International, Ltd., Scott Rohleder, and Ignite International Brands, Ltd. IT IS SO ORDERED:

Nancy J. Re She ) United States Magistrate Judge DATED: April 21, 2025

3o0f3