Collins v. C R Bard Incorporated

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided December 18, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-01864·Unknown

Opinion

1 ERIC W. SWANIS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 6840 2 GLENN F. MEIER, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 006059 3 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 10845 Griffith Peak Drive, Suite 600 4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702) 792-3773 5 Facsimile: (702) 792-9002 6 Email: swanise@gtlaw.com meierg@gtlaw.com 7 CASEY SHPALL, ESQ.* GREGORY R. TAN, ESQ.* 8 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 9 1144 15th Street, Suite 3300 Denver, Colorado 80202 10 Telephone: (303) 572-6500 Email: shpallc@gtlaw.com 11 tangr@gtlaw.com *Admitted Pro Hac Vice 12 C ounsel for Defendants 13 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15

FOR THE DISTRI CT OF NEVADA 16 PEGGY COLLINS, Case No. 2:19-cv-01864-RFB-BNW

17 Plaintiff, STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY AND PRE-TRIAL 18 v. DEADLINES (FOURTH REQUEST) 19 C. R. BARD, INCORPORATED and BARD 20 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INCORPORATED,

21 Defendants. 22 23 Comes now, Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (“Bard” 24 or “Defendants”) and Plaintiff Peggy Collins (“Plaintiff”), by and through their undersigned 25 counsel of record, pursuant to LR IA 6-2, and hereby stipulate that the discovery deadlines 26 are extended by sixty (60) days as detailed below. This Stipulation is entered into as a result 27 of the current national emergency caused by the spread of COVID-19 and continuing 28 difficulties in locating and scheduling the depositions of Plaintiff’s treating physicians. 1 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(b) and 26, and the Court’s inherent 2 authority and discretion to manage its own docket, this Court has the authority to grant the 3 requested extension. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a 4 specified time the court may, for good cause, extend the time....”). Furthermore, Federal Rule 5 of Civil Procedure 26(c) and (d) vests the Court with authority to limit the scope of discovery 6 or control its sequence. Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998) (“Rule 26 vests 7 the trial judge with broad discretion to tailor discovery narrowly and to dictate the sequence 8 of discovery.”). 9 This Court therefore has broad discretion to extend deadlines or stay proceedings as 10 incidental to its power to control its own docket. Bacon v. Reyes, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11 143300, at *4 (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2013) (citing, Munoz-Santana v. U.S. I.N.S., 742 F.2d 561, 12 562 (9th Cir. 1984)) (“Whether to grant a stay is within the discretion of the court”); Lockyer 13 v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (“A district court has discretionary 14 power to stay proceedings in its own court.”). The exercise of this discretion is particularly 15 appropriate where, as here, such action would promote judicial economy and efficiency. 16 Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936) (“[T]he power to stay proceedings is 17 incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its 18 docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.”). 19 For the foregoing reasons, the Parties stipulate and request that this Court modify the 20 Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, Dkt. 40, as follows: 21 22 PROPOSED DATE DEADLINE 23 March 13, 2021 Close of case-specific fact discovery. 24 May 28, 2021 Parties shall produce case-specific expert reports. 25 26 June 28, 2021 Parties shall produce any case-specific rebuttal expert reports. 27 July 27, 2021 Deadline to depose Plaintiff’s experts on their case-specific reports. 28 August 20, 2021 Deadline to depose Defendants’ experts on their case-specific reports. 2 October 8, 2021 | Deadline to file Daubert motions and other dispositive motions. 3 4 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 5 Dated this 14 day of December 2020. 6 7 MARTIN BAUGHMAN, PLLC GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 8 || By: /s/Ben C. Martin By: /s/ Eric W. Swanis 9 BEN C. MARTIN, ESQ.* ERIC W. SWANIS, ESQ. bmartin@martinbaughman.com swanise@gtlaw.com 10 3710 Rawlins Street, Suite 1230 Nevada Bar No. 006840 Dallas, Texas 75219 GLENN F. MEIER, ESQ. Telephone: (214) 761-6614 meierg@gtlaw.com D *Admitted Pro Hac Vice Nevada Bar No. 006059 eee 13 PETER C. WETHERALL, ESQ. 10845 Griffith Peak Drive, Ste. 600 a5 8 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 woe Nevada Bar No. 004414 T 1 h . 702 792 3773 14 pwetherall@wetherallgroup.com elephone: (702) 792- WETHERALL GROUP, LTD. 15 9345 W. Sunset Road, Suite 100 oie, SOP ATs ESQS see Las Vegas, Nevada 89148 shpalle@gtlaw.com 16 ? Telephone: (702) 838-8500 GREGORY R. TAN, ESQ.* 7 tangr@gtlaw.com GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP C | for Plaint ? 18 ounsel for Plaintiff 1144 15" Street, Suite 3300 Denver, Colorado 80202 19 Telephone: (303) 572-6500 *Admitted Pro Hac Vice 21 Counsel for Defendants 22 23 ORDER 24 IT IS SO ORDERED 25 DATED: 11:40 am, December 18, 2020 26 Gra Lea wre bet BRENDA WEKSLER 28 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Collins v. C R Bard Incorporated, (D. Nev. 2020).

Collins v. C R Bard Incorporated (Collins v. C R Bard Incorporated) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Landis v. North American Co.
299 U.S. 248 (Supreme Court, 1936)
Crawford-El v. Britton
523 U.S. 574 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Lockyer v. Mirant Corp.
398 F.3d 1098 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)