Singer v. C R Bard Incorporated

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: November 20, 2020
• Docket: 2:19-cv-01579
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

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

FOR THE DISTRI CT OF NEVADA 13 ROBERT SINGER, Case No. 2:19-cv-01579-JCM-BNW

14 Plaintiff, STIPULATION TO EXTEND 15 DISCOVERY AND PRE-TRIAL v. DEADLINES 16 C. R. BARD, INCORPORATED and BARD (THIRD REQUEST) 17 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INCORPORATED,

18 Defendants. 19 20 COME NOW Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (“Bard” 21 or “Defendants”) and Plaintiff Robert Singer (“Plaintiff”), by and through their undersigned 22 counsel of record, pursuant to LR IA 6-1, and hereby stipulate that the discovery deadlines 23 be extended as outlined below. This is the third requests for extension of discovery 24 deadlines. 25 This Stipulation is entered into as a result of the current national emergency caused by 26 the spread of COVID-19. The process of collecting Plaintiff’s medical records in this case 27 is taking longer than originally anticipated because of delays due to medical providers’ efforts to focus on the pandemic, medical practice staffing shortages, and government agency 1 furloughs. The parties are now in the process of deposing fact witnesses, and the Plaintiff 2 has been deposed. However, it has been extremely difficult, in light of the COVID-19 3 pandemic, to schedule the depositions of Plaintiff’s treating physicians. The medical 4 testimony is essential to the prosecution and defense of the case. Additionally, the Parties 5 continue to actively engage in global settlement discussions. 6 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(b) and 26, and the Court’s inherent 7 authority and discretion to manage its own docket, this Court has the authority to grant the 8 requested extension. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a 9 specified time the court may, for good cause, extend the time....”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) (“A 10 party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the 11 court where the action is pending . . . The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect 12 a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or 13 expense.”). Furthermore, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(c) and 26(d) vest the Court 14 with authority to limit the scope of discovery or control its sequence. Crawford-El v. Britton, 15 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998) (“Rule 26 vests the trial judge with broad discretion to tailor 16 discovery narrowly and to dictate the sequence of discovery.”). 17 This Court therefore has broad discretion to extend deadlines or stay proceedings as 18 incidental to its power to control its own docket – particularly where, as here, such action 19 would promote judicial economy and efficiency. Bacon v. Reyes, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20 143300, at *4 (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2013) (citing, Munoz-Santana v. U.S. I.N.S., 742 F.2d 561, 21 562 (9th Cir. 1984)) (“Whether to grant a stay is within the discretion of the court”); Lockyer 22 v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (“A district court has discretionary 23 power to stay proceedings in its own court.”); Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936) 24 (“[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control 25 the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for 26 counsel, and for litigants.”). 27 For the foregoing reasons, the parties stipulate and request that this Court modify the 2 March 8, 2021 Case-specific fact discovery closes. 3 April 5, 2021 The Plaintiff shall produce case-specific expert reports. 4 May 3, 2021 The Defendants shall produce case-specific expert reports. 5 May 31, 2021 The Plaintiff shall produce any case-specific rebuttal expert 6 reports. 7 June 28, 2021 The Defendants shall produce any case-specific rebuttal expert reports. 8 July 26, 2021 Deadline to depose the Plaintiffs case-specific experts. 9 August 23, 2021 Deadline to depose the Defendants’ case-specific experts. 10 September 20, 2021 | Deadline to file Daubert motions and other dispositive motions. 1] IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated this 17" day of November 2020. 12 13 WETHERALL GROUP, LTD. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 14 || By: /s/Peter C. Wetherall By: /s/Eric W. Swanis 15 PETER C. WETHERALL, ESQ. ERIC W. SWANIS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 4414 Nevada Bar No. 6840 16 pwetherall@wetherallgroup.com swanise@gtlaw.com 9345 W. Sunset Road, Suite 100 10845 Griffith Peak Drive, Ste. 600 7 Las Vegas, Nevada 89148 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702) 838-8500 Telephone: (702) 792-3773 18 Facsimile: (702) 837-5081 Facsimile: (702) 792-9002 Email: swanise@gtlaw.com 19 Counsel for Plaintiff Counsel for Defendants 20 >] IT ISSO ORDERED. The Court encourages the parties Ki f Q to complete discovery during this La WE newly extended period using all BRENDA WEKSLER technological means possible. 23 United States Magistrate Judge 24 Dated November 20, 2020. 25 26 27 28