H. v. Boyd Gaming Corp.

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: January 30, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00939
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * *

7 CATELYN H., pseudonymously, Case No.2:24-CV-939 JCM (DJA)

8 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 9 v.

10 G6 HOSPITALITY, LLC,

11 Defendant(s). V 12 13 Presently before the court is defendants’ motion for leave to file supplemental authority. 14 (ECF No. 78). Plaintiff filed a response (ECF No. 79), to which defendants replied (ECF No. 80). 15 Defendants Boyd Gaming Corporation, Venetian Gaming Las Vegas LLC, and The Mirage 16 Casino Hotel, LLC seek leave to file supplemental authority in support of their respective motions 17 to dismiss plaintiff’s first amended complaint. Specifically, defendants seek to admit Judge 18 Gordon’s decision in Tyla D. v. MGM Resorts International, No. 2:24-cv-00698-APG-BNW (D. 19 Nev. Nov. 20, 2024), based on alleged similarities between the cases. Plaintiff opposes the motion, 20 and alternatively requests leave to file additional supplemental authority from this court in the case 21 Sarah C. v. Hilton Franchise Holding LLC et al., No. 2:23-cv-02037-APG-DJA (D. Nev. Nov. 12, 22 2024). 23 The Court may grant leave to file supplemental authorities “for good cause.” LR 7-2(g). 24 “Good cause may exist either when the proffered supplemental authority controls the outcome of 25 the litigation, or when the proffered supplemental authority is precedential, or particularly 26 persuasive or helpful.” Alps Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Kalicki Collier, LLP, 526 F.3d 805, 812 (D. 27 Nev. 2021). Here, the court finds good cause exists to grant both the defendants’ motion and 28 plaintiff’s request to supplement, as the new authority may have a persuasive effect on the outcome 1 of this litigation. 2 Accordingly, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that defendants’ motion for 4 leave to supplement (ECF No. 78) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Catelyn H. (pseudonymously) is granted leave 6 to supplement with the authority represented in the response to defendants’ motion (ECF No. 79).

7 DATED January 30, 2025. 8

9 ________________________________________ 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28