Giller v. AIRBNB, Inc.

Opinion

David A. Carroll (Nevada Bar No. 7643) dcarroll@rrsc-law.com Anthony J. DiRaimondo (Nevada Bar No. 10875) adiraimondo@rrsc-law.com Robert E. Opdyke (Nevada State Bar No. 12841) ropdyke@rrsc-law.com 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1200 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 Telephone: (702) 732-9099 Michael R. Reese (pro hac vice) mreese@reesellp.com REESE LLP 100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor New York, New York 10025 Telephone: (212) 643-0500

George V. Granade (pro hac vice) ggranade@reesellp.com 8484 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 515 Los Angeles, California 90211 Telephone: (310) 393-0070 Counsel for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class

Case No. 2:24-cv-01266-RFB-BNW AMY GILLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR v. FILING OF DISCOVERY PLAN

AIRBNB, INC., a Delaware corporation, (FIRST REQUEST)

Defendant.

Plaintiff Amy Giller (“Plaintiff” or “Giller”), on one hand, and Defendant Airbnb, Inc. (“Defendant”or“Airbnb”),ontheotherhand,byandthroughtheirrespectiveundersignedattorneys of record, hereby stipulate and agree to extend the deadline to file a discovery plan in this case. The current deadline is September 10, 2024. This is the first request for an extension of time concerning this deadline. 1. On July 24, 2024, Defendant filed two motions, the Motion to Compel Arbitration (originally ECF No. 9, with corrected image filed the next day as ECF No. 11) and the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10) (the “Motions”). The Court entered an extended briefing schedule (ECF No. 19), which sets the deadline of September 12, 2024, for the filing of Plaintiff’s oppositions to the Motions. 2. Based on the date of filing of Defendant’s Motions, LR 26-1(a) required the parties to hold the Rule 26(f) conference on or before August 26, 2024, and for a discovery plan to be submitted before September 10, 2024. 3. On or shortly after July 24, 2024, the parties met and conferred telephonically about a discovery plan. Defendant inquired with Plaintiff whether Plaintiff would agree to a stay of discovery while the Motions were pending. Plaintiff requested additional time to consider the request, including to evaluate the positions taken by Defendants’ Motions, which had only been recently filed. 4. A continued meet and confer was scheduled for August 28, 2024, but this was continued to September 5, 2024 based on an emergency hearing set in another matter, which presented a conflict for Defendant. 5. On September 5, 2024, the parties held the continued meet and confer via Microsoft Teams virtual conference. The parties require additional time to consider each other’s positions concerning discovery. Among other things, additional time will allow Plaintiff to file her opposition to the Motions on or before September 12, 2024 (ECF No. 19), which will include substantive arguments relevant to the analysis of whether a stay is appropriate under applicable law. Ministerio Roca Solida v. U.S. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, 288 F.R.D. 500, merits of the potentially dispositive motion to dismiss and determine whether it is convinced that the plaintiff is unable to state a claim for relief). Additional time will allow the parties to submit a discovery plan that includes their respective positions (to the extent they are unable to reach an agreement on a discovery plan or a stay of discovery). 6. SubjecttotheCourt’sapprovalofthisstipulation,thepartiesarescheduledtocontinuetheir meet and confer on September 19, 2024 via Microsoft Teams. Accordingly, the parties request up to and including October 1, 2024, to file their discovery plan. 7. The parties also agree that their respective Rule 26 Initial Disclosures shall be produced within fourteen (14) days of the submission of the parties’ discovery plan (i.e.,on or before October 15, 2024), assuming no motion to stay discovery has been filed. 8. Nothing in this stipulation shall constitute awaiver ofDefendant’s rights to fileamotion to stay discovery. Nor shall this stipulation constitute a waiver of Plaintiff’s rights to oppose any stay of discovery sought by Defendant. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// ///

1 9. Good cause exists to grant this stipulation and it is submitted in good faith, is not interposed 2 for delay, and is not filed for an improper purpose. 3 ated: September 10, 2024 Dated: September 10, 2024 4 Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, 5 RICE REUTHER SULLIVAN & FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. 6 CARROLL, LLP 7 8 /s/___ Anthony J. DiRaimondo {s/____Richard I. Dreitzer David A. Carroll, Esq. (NSB #7643) Richard I. Dreitzer, Esq. (NSB #6626) 9 ] Anthony J. DiRaimondo, Esq. (NSB #10875) Luis E. Montanez, Esq. (NSB #16281) Robert E. Opdyke, Esq. (NSB #12841) 9275 W. Russell Road, Suite 240 10 /3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1200 Las Vegas, Nevada 89148 1 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class Attorneys for Defendant Airbnb, Inc. ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED

16 Ls Are 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 DATED: September 11, 2024 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28