BRITTNEY PHILLIPS, an individual v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Opinion

JEMMA E. DUNN 11 Nevada Bar No. 16229 Nevada Bar No. 16880 Nevada Bar No. 14579 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 730 55 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 66 Telephone: (702) 777-0888 Facsimile: (702) 777-0801 77 JDunn@GGTrialLaw.com MHale@GGTrialLaw.com 88 MMassey@GGTrialLaw.com

1100 Attorneys for Plaintiff Brittney Phillips 1111

1133 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 1144 BRITTNEY PHILLIPS, an individual, Case No.: 2:25-cv-01351-CDS-BNW 1155

1166 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY SCHEDULING 1177 v. ORDER DEADLINES

1188 WALMART INC., a Delaware Corporation; (THIRD REQUEST) 1199 WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, 2200

2211 Defendants.

2233 2244 Plaintiff Brittney Phillips ("Plaintiff"), by and through her counsel of record, Greenberg 2255 Gross LLP, and Defendants Walmart Inc. and Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. ("Defendants"), by and 2266 through their counsel of record, Littler Mendelson, P.C., hereby stipulate and agree to extend the 2277 unexpired discovery deadlines for sixty (60) days. This is the parties' third request for an extension. 11 A. Discovery Completed to Date. 22 To date, the parties have conducted the following discovery: 33  Oct. 24, 2025: Plaintiff served her Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(1)(A). 44  Oct. 29, 2025: Defendants Walmart Inc. and Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. served their Initial 55 Rule 26(a)(1) Disclosures. 66  Dec. 12, 2025: Defendants served their First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Brittney 77 Phillips. 88  Dec. 12, 2025: Defendants served their First Request for Production of Documents to 99 Plaintiff Brittney Phillips. 1100  Dec. 23, 2025: Defendant Walmart Inc. served responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of 1111 Interrogatories. 1122  Dec. 23, 2025: Defendant Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. served responses to Plaintiff’s First Set 1133 of Interrogatories. 1144  Dec. 23, 2025: Defendant Walmart Inc. served responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests 1155 for Production of Documents. 1166  Dec. 23, 2025: Defendant Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. served responses to Plaintiff’s First Set 1177 of Requests for Production of Documents. 1188  Dec. 23, 2025: Concurrently with serving their responses to Plaintiff’s written discovery, 1199 Defendants also produced supplemental disclosure documents totaling approximately 2200 400 pages. 2211  Jan. 12, 2026: Plaintiff served her First Supplement to Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP 2222 26(e). 2233  Jan. 12, 2026: Plaintiff served answers to Defendants Walmart Inc.’s and Wal-Mart 2244 Associates, Inc.’s First Set of Interrogatories. 2255  Jan. 12, 2026: Plaintiff served responses to Defendants Walmart Inc.’s and Wal-Mart 2266 Associates, Inc.’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents. 2277  Feb. 2, 2026: Plaintiff served her Second Supplement to Initial Disclosures pursuant to 11 FRCP 26(e). 22  Feb. 6, 2026: Plaintiff served her Initial Designation of Expert Witnesses pursuant to FRCP 33 26(a)(2). 44  Apr. 14, 2026: Plaintiff served her First Set of Requests for Admissions to Defendant 55 Walmart Inc. 66  Apr. 15, 2026: Plaintiff served her First Set of Requests for Admissions to Defendant Wal- 77 Mart Associates, Inc. 88  Apr. 16, 2026: Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition of Amber Haines, setting the 99 deposition for May 1, 2026. 1100  Apr. 16, 2026: Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition of Corinna Cannon, setting the 1111 deposition for May 4, 2026. 1122  Apr. 16, 2026: Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition of Mina Davis, setting the deposition 1133 for May 6, 2026. 1144  Apr. 20, 2026: Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition of Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.’s FRCP 1155 30(b)(6) representative, setting the deposition for May 14, 2026. 1166  Apr. 20, 2026: Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition of Walmart Inc.’s FRCP 30(b)(6) 1177 representative, setting the deposition for May 15, 2026. 1188  Apr. 22, 2026: Plaintiff served her Third Supplement to Initial Disclosures pursuant to 1199 FRCP 26(e). 2200  Apr. 24, 2026: In advance of Defendants’ supplemental written discovery responses, 2211 Defendants served supplemental disclosure materials, which included an additional 333 2222 pages of documents. 2233  Apr. 28, 2026: Defendant Walmart Inc. served its First Supplemental Responses to 2244 Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories. 2255  Apr. 28, 2026: Defendant Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. served its First Supplemental 2266 Responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories. 2277  Apr. 28, 2026: Defendant Walmart Inc. served its First Supplemental Responses to 11 Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents. 22  Apr. 28, 2026: Defendant Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. served its First Supplemental 33 Responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents. 44  Apr. 28, 2026: Plaintiff served an Amended Notice of Deposition of Amber Haines, 55 resetting the deposition for June 10, 2026. 66  May 12, 2026: Defendant Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. served responses to Plaintiff’s First Set 77 of Requests for Admissions. 88  May 12, 2026: Defendant Walmart Inc. served responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests 99 for Admissions. 1100  May 12, 2026: Defendants served objections to Plaintiff’s Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice. 1111  June 10, 2026: Plaintiff served an Amended Notice of Deposition of Corinna Cannon, 1122 resetting the deposition for September 1, 2026. 1133  June 10, 2026: Plaintiff served an Amended Notice of Deposition of Mina Davis, resetting 1144 the deposition for September 8, 2026. 1155  June 16, 2026: Plaintiff served an Amended Notice of Deposition of Walmart Inc.’s FRCP 1166 30(b)(6) representative, setting the deposition for July 24, 2026. 1177  June 16, 2026: Plaintiff served an Amended Notice of Deposition of Wal-Mart Associates, 1188 Inc.’s FRCP 30(b)(6) representative, setting the deposition for July 24, 2026. 1199  June 25, 2026: Defendants re-served by email the supplemental document production 2200 previously transmitted on April 24, 2026. 2211  July 2, 2026: Plaintiff served a Second Amended Notice of Deposition of Amber Haines, 2222 resetting the deposition for September 3, 2026. 2233 B. Discovery Which Still Needs to Occur. 2244 Plaintiff intends to take the depositions of Amber Haines, Mina Davis, Corinna Cannon, 2255 Michael Yturralde, and Merribel Ferrer, as well as the FRCP 30(b)(6) depositions of Defendants' 2266 corporate representatives. Plaintiff has currently scheduled the deposition of Amber Haines for 2277 September 3, 2026, the deposition of Corinna Cannon for September 1, 2026, and the deposition of 11 Mina Davis for September 8, 2026. The FRCP 30(b)(6) depositions are currently scheduled for July 22 24, 2026. The parties are engaging in meet and confer efforts relating to the FRCP 30(b)(6) 33 representative depositions and the scope of Plaintiff's written discovery requests. Defendants intend 44 to take Plaintiff’s deposition and have requested Plaintiff’s availability for that deposition, with 55 proposed dates still forthcoming. Defendants intend to serve third-party subpoenas as well and may 66 propound additional written discovery based on information learned through ongoing discovery 77 Plaintiff also intends to issue third-party subpoenas and may conduct additional written discovery 88 and depositions of other fact witnesses based upon information learned in the foregoing depositions. 99 Further, the parties intend to continue supplementing their written discovery responses and 1100 document productions. 1111 C. Proposed Schedule for Completing Remaining Discovery. 1122 The deadlines for amending the pleadings and adding parties, initial expert disclosures, and 1133 rebuttal expert disclosures have already expired and are not affected by this request. The parties 1144 propose the following extension of the remaining unexpired deadlines: 1155 Discovery Cut-Off Date. The August 7, 2026, discovery cut-off date shall be extended sixty 1166 (60) days to Tuesday, October 6, 2026. 1177 Dispositive Motions. The September 4, 2026, dispositive motions deadline shall be 1188 extended to Thursday, November 5, 2026, which is thirty (30) days after the discovery deadline. 1199 Pretrial Order. If no dispositive motions are filed, the Joint Pretrial Order shall be filed 2200 thirty (30) days after the date set for the filing of the dispositive motions. As the thirtieth day falls 2211 on Saturday, December 5, 2026, a non-judicial day, the Joint Pretrial Order shall be due Monday, 2222 December 7, 2026. In the event dispositive motions are filed, the date for filing the Joint Pretrial 2233 Order shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision on the dispositive motions or by 2244 further order of the Court. 2255 D. Good Cause Supports the Request to Extend the Deadlines as Set Forth Herein. 2266 When a stipulation requires the modification of the scheduling order, the parties must first 2277 11 Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule may be 22 modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.”). The good cause inquiry is focused on 33 the movant’s reasons for seeking to modify the scheduling order and primarily considers the 44 movant’s diligence. In re W. States Wholesale Nat. Gas Antitrust Litig., 715 F.3d 716, 737 (9th Cir. 55 2013). The key determination is whether the subject deadline “cannot reasonably be met despite the 66 diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609. The Court considers whether 77 relief from the scheduling order is sought based on the development of matters that could not have 88 been reasonably anticipated at the time the schedule was established. Jackson v. Laureate, Inc., 186 99 F.R.D. 605, 608 (E.D. Cal. 1999). Courts may also consider other pertinent circumstances, including 1100 whether the movant was diligent in seeking modification of the scheduling order once it became 1111 apparent that the movant required relief from the deadline at issue. Sharp v. Covenant Care LLC, 1122 288 F.R.D. 465, 467 (S.D. Cal. 2012). “The diligence obligation is ongoing” such that parties must 1133 “diligently attempt to adhere to [the deadlines in the scheduling order] throughout the subsequent 1144 course of the litigation.” Id. 1155 Good cause supports the parties' request to extend the Discovery Cut-Off, Dispositive 1166 Motions, and Pretrial Order deadlines. The parties have been diligent in conducting written 1177 discovery, exchanging supplemental disclosures, and engaging in meaningful meet and confer 1188 efforts. The parties have also spent substantial time evaluating potential informal resolution and, for 1199 a period, focused attention on whether the matter could be resolved without incurring the additional 2200 expense of depositions and related discovery. Although those efforts did not result in resolution, 2211 they were undertaken in good faith and affected the timing and sequencing of discovery efforts. 2222 In addition, there have been transitions in defense counsel’s handling of the matter during 2233 the course of discovery. Those transitions, together with scheduling constraints and competing 2244 deadlines, affected the coordination of certain discovery tasks and witness scheduling. Even so, the 2255 parties have continued moving discovery forward and are working to complete the remaining items 2266 as efficiently as possible. 2277 Due to the schedules of counsel and the witnesses, the depositions identified above are in 1 the process of being rescheduled, and the parties continue to meet and confer regarding the FRCP 2 30(b)(6) representative depositions before those depositions can be reset. Considering the foregoing, 3 the parties are unable to complete the remaining depositions and written discovery before the current 4 discovery deadline. This request is timely under LR 26-3, as it is submitted at least twenty-one (21) 5 days before each affected deadline, and it is made in good faith and not for purposes of undue delay. 6 The parties submit that these circumstances satisfy the required good cause in extending the 7 deadlines referenced above. 8 The parties hereby stipulate to the aforementioned. 9 DATED: July 17, 2026 10 /s/ Marian Massey /s/ Hayley Cummings JEMMA E. DUNN Kathryn B. Blakey, Esq. 11 ! Nevada Bar No. 16229 Nevada Bar No. 12701 2 MATTHEW T. HALE LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Nevada Bar No. 16880 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1500 13 MARIAN L. MASSEY Dallas, Texas 75201 Nevada Bar No. 14579 14 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 730 Hayley Cummings, Esq. 15 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Nevada Bar No. 14858 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 16 Attorneys for Plaintiff 8474 Rozita Lee Avenue Suite 200 17 Las Vegas, Nevada 89113-4770 18 Attorneys for Defendant 19 ORDER 20 IT IS SO ORDERED: 21 .

33 UNI ATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24 35 DATED: July 20, 2026 26 27 28 7. STIDITT ATION ANTI APHED THA □□ TEND NICCHOVULPY COULNIN I APHEP