Halgat v. United States

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedAugust 15, 2023
Docket2:22-cv-00592
StatusUnknown

This text of Halgat v. United States (Halgat v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Halgat v. United States, (D. Nev. 2023).

Opinion

1 Jacob A. Bennett New York State Bar No. 5753744 2 Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division 3 Constitutional and Specialized Tort Litigation 175 N. St. NE, Rm. 1815 4 Washington, D.C. 20002 Telephone: (202) 451-7745 5 Fax: (202) 616-4314 Jacob.A.Bennett@usdoj.gov 6 Attorney for Defendant the United States 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 JEREMY JOHN HALGAT, ) Case No: 2:22-cv-592-RFB-EJY 9 an individual ) ) 10 Plaintiff ) v. ) STIPULATION TO DEFER 11 ) SUBMISSION OF DISCOVERY PLAN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) AND SCHEDULING ORDER 12 ) AND TO STAY DISCOVERY Defendant. ) 13 ) ) 14 ) ) 15 ) ) 16 ) ) 17 In light of the requirements imposed by Local Rule 26-1, it is hereby agreed and 18 stipulated by all Parties, through their respective counsel, as follows: 19 1. This is an action seeking damages from the United States under the Federal Tort 20 Claims Act (“FTCA”). 21 2. Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint (FAC) on July 15, 2023. See ECF No. 69. 22 3. The United States moved to dismiss all claims on July 28, 2023. See ECF No. 71. 23 4. The United States has argued that it has not waived sovereign immunity for 24 Plaintiff’s claims, and therefore that the FAC is subject to dismissal for want of subject matter 25 jurisdiction. See Donovan v. Vance, 70 F.4th 1167, 1172 (9th Cir. 2023) (sovereign immunity “is 26 a threshold jurisdictional issue.”) (internal quotations and citations omitted). The United States 27 has further argued that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim. See ECF No. 71. 1 motion are appropriate would be where the dispositive motion raises issues of jurisdiction, 2 venue, or immunity.” Bacon v. Reyes, No. 2:12-cv-1222-JCM-VCF, 2013 WL 5522263, at *2 (D. 3 Nev. Oct. 3, 2013) (citing TradeBay, LLC v. Ebay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597, 600 (D. Nev. 2011)) 4 (emphasis added). 5 6. It is the position of the Parties that discovery and related pretrial deadlines should 6 be stayed until disposition by the Court of the pending motion to dismiss, which raises issues of 7 jurisdiction and immunity. 8 7. Under the Court’s Local Rules, Plaintiff’s Opposition to the motion was due 9 August 11, 2023. However, the Parties have agreed that Plaintiff may have an additional 30 days 10 to respond to the pending motion to dismiss. See ECF No. 73. 11 8. The Parties further agree that the submission of the Discovery Plan and 12 Scheduling Order under Local Rule 26-1 should be deferred and discovery stayed in this civil 13 action until after the Court’s disposition of the pending motion to dismiss the FAC. The Parties 14 agree the cost and efficiency of discovery will be better managed if appropriate discovery can be 15 planned and conducted after a decision is made by the Court regarding the legal viability of 16 Plaintiff’s claims. 17 9. The Parties jointly request the Court’s approval of their stipulation to defer 18 submission of the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order and to stay discovery until after the 19 Court’s disposition of the pending motion to dismiss, ECF No. 71. 20 21 / / / 22 23 / / / 24 25 / / / 26 27 / / / 1 |) Respectfully submitted this 14th day of August, 2023 2 BRIAN M. BOYNTON 3 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 4 Civil Division C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO, JR. 5 || Director 6 Torts Branch, Civil Division ANDREA W. MCCARTHY 7 Deputy Director g Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/Jacob A. Bennett 9 || JACOB A. BENNETT Trial Attorney /s/ Melanie A. Hill 10 || Torts Branch, Civil Division MELANIE A. HILL Constitutional and Specialized Tort Nevada Bar No. 8796 1 Litigation 1925 Village Center Circle, Suite 150 175 N St. NE, Rm. 1815 Las Vegas, Nevada 89134 12 Washington, DC 20002 Telephone: (702) 362-8500 Telephone: (202) 451-7745 Facsimile: (702) 362-8505 13 || Fax: (202) 616-4314 Melanie@MelanieHillLaw.com Jacob.A.Bennett@usdo].gov Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeremy John Halgat 14 Attorneys for Defendants the United States 15 16 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED: 20 21 2 United/StatesMagistrate Judge 23 Dated: August 15, 2023 24 25 26 27 28

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

Related

Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc.
278 F.R.D. 597 (D. Nevada, 2011)
David Donovan v. Brian Vance
70 F.4th 1167 (Ninth Circuit, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Halgat v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/halgat-v-united-states-nvd-2023.