Kelly-Harrison, Inc. v. CHDP Pahrump, LLC, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Kelly-Harrison, Inc., Case No.: 2:25-cv-00132-DJA Plaintiff, Order v.

CHDP Pahrump, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

On May 8, 2026, the Court issued an order setting a settlement conference in the instant case for August 3, 2026. Docket No. 26. The order specified, inter alia, the requirements for the mandatory settlement conference statement to be submitted to the Court. Id. at 2-3. Specifically, the Court ordered that the statement must contain “[t]he initial settlement proposal that will be presented at the settlement conference with a justification for any monetary amount. The proposal must include any non-monetary settlement terms that will be presented.” Id. at 3. Plaintiff’s statement fails to comply with this requirement, as well as many of the other requirements in the Court’s order. No later than July 31, 2026, at 3:00 p.m., Plaintiff must provide an updated settlement conference statement that complies in full with the Court’s requirements, as set forth in the order at Docket No. 26. Plaintiff must provide this statement, in an envelope marked “Confidential,” directly to the undersigned’s box in the Clerk’s Office.1 1 When the parties provided their initial settlement conference statements to the Court, each party filed a notice of in camera review on the docket. Docket Nos. 27, 28. Such notices are ] Orders are not suggestions or recommendations; they are directives with which complianc 2\}is mandatory. See, e.g., Chapman, 613 F.2d at 197; see also Weddell v. Stewart, 261 P.3d 1080 1085 & n.9 (Nev. 2011). FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS. 6 DATED: July 29, 2026.

9 UNITED-STAFES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1] unnecessary and serve only to clog the docket. Plaintiff must not file such a notice when it provide the Court with its updated settlement conference statement.