1|| RAMZY P. LADAH, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 11405 2|| CARL R. HOUSTON, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 11161 LADAH LAW FIRM 517S. Third Street Las Vegas, NV 89101 litigation @ ladahlaw.com 5 || T: 702.252.0055 F: 702.248.0055 6 || Attorney for Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

9 CARL BONGIOVANNL, individual; Case No.: 2:20-cv-01122-GMN-EJY 10 Plaintiff, > Vs. > 11 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO v SAM’S WEST, INC. dba SAM’S CLUB #4983, a | EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES Ss foreign corporation; DOES I through XXX, (SECOND REQUEST) 13}| inclusive and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES I through XXX, inclusive, fo 14 Defendants. 15 16 Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, and for good cause shown, the parties, by and throu 17 their respective counsel of record hereby stipulate and agree to and jointly move this Honoral 18 Court for an order to continue discovery by sixty (60) days as indicated below. 19 20 I. INTRODUCTION AND PERTINENT BACKGROUND

On August 16, 2018, Plaintiff purchased packaged beef from Defendant within Defendan

22 premises. Defendant advertised the packaged beef as safe to eat and sold the beef to Plaintiff 23 || consumption. Upon consuming the beef, a day later, Plaintiff immediately felt ill. Plain 24 || presented to the hospital wherein he learned he suffered serious food poisoning due to salmone 25 || Plaintiff soon thereafter learned there was a recall by Defendant of some beef products for conce 26 of salmonella contamination. Plaintiff suffered serious and substantial injuries that □□□□□□ 27 immediate and subsequent medical attention. Plaintiff alleges that his injuries are a direct 2 28

|| proximate result of Defendant’s negligence regarding the handling of the subject beef, including ' 2 purchasing, inspecting, marketing and selling of the subject beef to Plaintiff. 3 Plaintiff filed his compliant in the District Court, Clark County, Nevada and Defend: 4 removed the lawsuit to the United States District Court, District of Nevada. 5 On November 23, 2020, Defendant’s new Counsel Joshua Evan Swiger received approval 6 practice in the United States District Court, District of Nevada. 7 Due to the transition of the attorneys for Defendant, and issues related to the Defendan 8 business as a result of the busy period surrounding fall and winter holidays, Plaintiff's discov ? requests propounded on Defendant on October 29, 2020 remained unanswered. Plaintiffs Coun 10 granted Defendant an extension to January 14, 2021. The Parties have agreed to the terms Defendant’s protective order regarding requested documents and have provided them to Plaintiff. = The Parties are requesting an extension of the current discovery deadlines as they | 13 actively participating in settlement discussions. | M4 Currently, the deadline to disclose expert witnesses is April 5, 2021 and the Parties do | IS want to undergo costs to retain expert witnesses if this matter can settle. 16 Therefore, in an abundance of caution, the Parties are requesting an additional sixty-days complete discovery as detailed below. 18 Il. DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE 19 The parties have completed the following disclosures and discovery: 20 1. The Parties have served initial disclosures and supplements thereto. 21 2. The Parties propounded and have responded to discovery requests. 22 3. The Defendant has served subpoenas to Plaintiff's medical providers. 43 4. The Parties continue to supplement their initial disclosures. 24 Il, SPECIFIC DISCOVERY REMAINING TO BE COMPLETED 25 1. Depositions of parties and/or witnesses; 26 2. Expert disclosures; a7 3. Depositions of treating physicians, 28 Page 2 of 6

1 4. Expert depositions; 2 5. Additional written discovery as necessary; 3 6. Disclosure of additional documents; 4 7. Subpoena/Obtain additional documents as necessary; and 5 8. The parties also anticipate that they may need to conduct other forms of discove 6 || though not specifically delineated herein, and anticipate doing so only on an as-needed basis. 7||IV. REASON & BASIS OF EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY DEADLINES REQUEST 8 Good Cause Exists to Extend Existing Discovery Deadlines 9 Pursuant to FRCP 16(b), a movant must establish “good cause” for amending <«

10 scheduling order, including the deadline for the close of discovery. See Johnson v. □□□□□ Recreations, Inc.,

(9" Cir. 1992); see also Local Rule 26-4; Werbicky

Green Tree Servicing, LLC, No. 2:12-CV-01567-JAD,

, at *1 (D. Nev. Oct. | || 20! 15 In determining whether “good cause” exists, the Court “primarily considers the diligence 16 || the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson,

. “The district court may modify 17 || pretrial schedule ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking | 18 || extension.”

(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16). The Court may also consider the prejudice the pa 1) will suffer as a result of not obtaining that discovery, although such a factor is secondary to diligence. /d. The district court has discretion in making such a determination. Jd.

» Should the Court find “good cause” exists, it must then consider whether there is a show!

3 of excusable neglect as to why the deadline was not completed before it passed. Nunez, sup 24 || “Excusable neglect encompasses situations in which the failure to comply with a filing deadline 25 || attributable to negligence.” Jd. (citing Lemoge v. U.S.,

(9" Cir. 2009). “Th 26 are at least four factors in determining whether neglect is excusable: (1) the danger of prejudice a the opposing party; (2) the length of the delay and its potential impact on the proceedings; (3) | 28 Page 3 of 6

|| reason for the delay; and (4) whether the movant acted in good faith.” Jd. (citing Bateman v. U 211 Postal Sery., 231 F.23d 1220, 1223-24 (9"" Cir. 2000)). “The determination of whether neglect 3 excusable is ultimately an equitable one, taking account of all relevant circumstances surround: 4 the party’s omission.” /d. (citing Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assoc. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U 380, 395 (1993)) (emphasis added). Based on the foregoing conveyed reasons, and throughout t

7 stipulation, the parties contend that the circumstances in this case meet each requirement for || order to continue discovery. An examination of the Bateman factors also weighs in favor 9 || granting the parties’ motion to reopen and extend the discovery deadlines:

10 a. The Dangers of Prejudice to the Opposing Party i Here, the analysis is simple—the parties are stipulating to continue discovery to av

prejudice imposed upon them if the extension is denied. In fact, both parties submit they will 4 equally prejudiced if the Court does not grant a continuation of the discovery deadlines in this cas

15 b. The Length of the Delay and Its Potential Impact on the Proceedings 16 Due to the reasons primarily discussed in Section (IV)(c), the parties request for 17 || additional 60 days to complete discovery. Furthermore, the parties do not believe that the requ 18 || will impact—let alone—delay a prospective trial date given the current pandemic climate ¢ 19 || unlikeness of trial during the next few months. 20 c. The Reason for the Delay 21 The Parties are actively participating in settlement discussions and do not want to expe || additional costs to retain experts if this matter can settle. 23 d. Whether Movants Acted in Good Faith Based on the foregoing, the parties’ position is that they have acted in good faith as

26 parties have agreed to stipulate to continue the discovery deadlines that are □□□□□□□□□ 27 warranted. In the absence of a stipulation, they would equally prejudiced because they would 28 || unable to conduct the necessary discovery to both prosecute and defend the instant case.

1 Finally, again, all parties participating in the litigation seek the discovery extensi 2|| Therefore, the parties respectfully submit that as joint movants, who are actively engaged □□□ 3 discovery process, have acted in good faith in seeking the extension requested herein. 4 In sum, the parties have diligently conducted discovery and are continuing to □□ ° cooperatively to complete the remaining discovery in order to prepare for trial. Good cause exi for modification of the current scheduling order to avoid prejudice to the parties. ’ V. CURRENT SCHEDULE TO COMPLETE REMAINING DISCOVERY: 5 Motions to Amend or Add Parties: 03/05/2021 ° Initial Expert Disclosures: 04/05/2021 Rebuttal Expert Disclosure: 05/05/2021 Close of Discovery: 06/04/2021 Dispositive Motion Deadline: 07/05/2021 = Joint Pre-Trial Order 08/05/2021 VI. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING DISCOVERY Motions to Amend or Add Parties: 05/04/2021 Initial Expert Disclosures: 06/04/2021 Rebuttal Expert Disclosure: 07/06/2021 8 Close of Discovery: 08/03/2021 Dispositive Motion Deadline: 09/03/2021 Joint Pre-Trial Order 10/04/2021 1 VU. CURRENT TRIAL DATE: No trial has been scheduled in this matter. A joint propesed pretrial order is due on Aug 5, 2021, or 30 days following this Court's ruling on any dispositive motions, if filed. The part seek additional time so that the same prepesed pretrial order is due October 4, 2021 or 30 days af this Court's ruling on dispositive motions. VOI. REQUEST NUMBER: This is the Second request for an extension of time to complete discovery.

Page 5 of 6

1 Wherefore, the parties respectfully request that the Court grant this request to extend | 2 || discovery deadlines as outlined above. 3 IT IS SO AGREED. 4|| Dated this 15 day of March 2021. Dated this 16™ day of March 2021. 5|| LADAH LAW FIRM WEINBERG, WHEELER, HUDGINS, GUNN 6 & DIAL, LLC || /s/ Ramzy P. Ladah /s/ Joshua E. Swiger RAMZY P. LADAH, ESQ. DANIELA LABOUNTY, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 11405 Nevada Bar No. 13169 CARL. R. HOUSTON 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 400 10 Nevada Bar No. 11161 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 517S. Third Street And 11 || Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 JOSHUA E. SWIGER Attorneys for Plaintiff (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) s 12 WEINBERG, WHEELER, HUDGINS, GUNN & DIAL, LLC 3344 Peachtree Road, N.E. Suite 2400 fo 14 Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Attorneys for Defendant 15 Sam's West, Inc., d/b/a/ Sam's Club #4983 16 ORDER 17 Pursuant to stipulation by the parties and for good cause shown, the deadlines and □□□□□□

18 || schedule in this case are extended and continued as follows: 19 Motions to Amend or Add Parties: 05/04/2021 20 Initial Expert Disclosures: 06/04/2021 Rebuttal Expert Disclosure: 07/06/2021 21 Close of Discovery: 08/03/2021 Dispositive Motion Deadline: 09/03/2021 22 Joint Pre-Trial Order 10/04/2021 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 DATED March 17, 2021. 26 ) Va UY Neo o? SLA oY □□□ / LAWN A YO CHAH 28 UNIZED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Page 6 of 6