Freeman v. C R Bard Incorporated

1 ERIC W. SWANIS, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 006840 GLENN F. MEIER, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 006059 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 10845 Griffith Peak Drive, Suite 600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702) 792.3773 Facsimile: (702) 792.9002 Email: [email protected] 6 [email protected] CHRISTOPHER J. NEUMANN, ESQ.* MATTHEW L. CROCKETT, ESQ.* GREGORY R. TAN, ESQ.* CANDACE UDUEBOR, ESQ.* *Admitted Pro Hac Vice GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 1144 15th Street, Suite 3300 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone: (303) 572.6500 Email: [email protected] 12 [email protected] [email protected] 13 [email protected] LORI G. COHEN, ESQ.

Admitted Pro Hac Vice GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP Terminus 200 333 Piedmont Road NE, Suite 2500 Atlanta, Georgia 30305 Telephone: (678) 553.2385 Email: [email protected] Counsel for Defendants 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 21 FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA REECE FREEMAN; BRITTANY FREEMAN, CASE NO. 2:19-cv-01572-RFB-BNW 23 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DISCOVERY v. DEADLINES FOR LIMITED PURPOSES C. R. BARD, INC.; BARD PERIPHERAL (FIRST REQUEST) VASCULAR, INCORPORATED, Defendants.

1 COME NOW Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (“Bard” or “Defendants”) and Plaintiffs REECE FREEMAN and BRITTANY FREEMAN (“Plaintiffs”), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, pursuant to LR IA 6-1, and hereby stipulate that the discovery deadlines be extended for the limited purpose of allowing the depositions of Plaintiffs’ disclosed family and friend witnesses as well as Defendants’ applicable territory and/or district managers as outlined below. This is the first request for extension of discovery deadlines for this limited purpose.

8 The parties have engaged in settlement discussions, have conducted written discovery, and are now in the process of deposing fact witnesses. Plaintiffs have been deposed. Mr. Freeman’s treating physicians have also been deposed or will be deposed within the deadline set by the Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, Dkt. 41. However, in an effort to conserve the resources of the Parties and to facilitate settlement discussions, the Parties have agreed to reserve the right to take the depositions of Plaintiffs’ disclosed family and friend witnesses, as well as Defendants’ applicable territory and district managers, until no later than thirty (30) days before trial is scheduled to begin.

16 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(b) and 26, and the Court’s inherent authority and discretion to manage its own docket, this Court has the authority to grant the requested extension.

18 Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time the court may, for good cause, extend the time....”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) (“A party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the court where the action is pending . . . The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense.”). Furthermore, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(c) and 26(d) vest the Court with authority to limit the scope of discovery or control its sequence.

24 Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998) (“Rule 26 vests the trial judge with broad discretion to tailor discovery narrowly and to dictate the sequence of discovery.”).

26 This Court therefore has broad discretion to extend deadlines or stay proceedings as incidental to its power to control its own docket – particularly where, as here, such action would promote |] Oct. 3, 2013) (citing, Munoz-Santana v. U.S. [.N.S., 742 F.2d 561, 562 (9th Cir. 1984)) (“Whethe || to grant a stay is within the discretion of the court”); Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 110!

3 }| (9th Cir. 2005) (“A district court has discretionary power to stay proceedings in its own court.”)

4 || Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936) (“[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental t || the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with □□□□□□ || of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.”’).

7 For the foregoing reasons, the parties stipulate and respectfully request that this Court modif || the Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, Dkt. 41, as follows (requested modification || are bolded): 10 DEADLINE March 8, 2021 Case-specific fact discovery closes with the exception of depositions 12 of Plaintiffs’ disclosed family and friend witnesses and Defendants’ applicable territory and district managers (which 13 shall be taken no later than 30 days before trial is scheduled to Le 14 Te Pama shall produce case-specific expert reports.

The Defendants shall produce case-specific expert reports.

16 The Plaintiffs shall produce any case-specific rebuttal expert reports.

M7 The Defendants shall produce any case-specific rebuttal expert reports.

18 Deadline to depose the Plaintiffs’ case-specific experts.

Deadline to depose the Defendants’ case-specific experts.

Deadline to file Daubert motions and other dispositive motions.

22 |\/// |I/// |/// WWII 1 IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2 Dated this 12™ day of February 2021.

3 WETHERALL GROUP, LTD. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP By: _/s/ Peter C. Wetherall By: /s/ Eric W. Swanis 5 PETER C. WETHERALL, ESQ. ERIC W. SWANIS, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 4414 Nevada Bar No. 006840 6 9345 W. Sunset Road, Suite 100 GLENN F. MEIER, ESQ.

Las Vegas, Nevada 89148 Nevada Bar No. 006059 7 Email: [email protected] 10845 Griffith Peak Drive, Suite 600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 g Counsel for Plaintiffs Email: [email protected] [email protected] 9 CHRISTOPHER J. NEUMANN, ESQ.

MATTHEW L. CROCKETT, ESQ.* 10 GREGORY R. TAN, ESQ.* CANDACE UDUEBOR, ESQ.* 11 *Admitted Pro Hac Vice GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 12 1144 15" Street, Suite 3300 > Denver, Colorado 80202 13 Email: [email protected] [email protected] 14 [email protected] 15 [email protected] LORI G. COHEN, ESQ.

16 Admitted Pro Hac Vice GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 17 Terminus 200 Piedmont Road NE, Suite 2500 18 Atlanta, Georgia 30305 Email: [email protected] 19 Counsel for Defendants 20 ORDER || IT IS ORDERED that the parties' stipulation is GRANTED. To the extent the excepted depositions are necessary for either party's summary judgment briefing, the excepted depositions must be taken prior to the deadline for dispositive motions.

23 IT IS SO ORDERED 24 DATED: 5:35 pm, February 16, 2021 Les Aree 26 BRENDA WEKSLER 27 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDG