American Preparatory Schools, Inc. v. Nevada Charter Academies

DALE A. HAYES, JR., ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 9056 LIANE K. WAKAYAMA, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 11313 JEREMY D. HOLMES, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 14379 4735 S. Durango Drive, Ste. 105 Las Vegas, Nevada 89147 (702) 656-0808 – Telephone (702) 655-1047 – Facsimile [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant Nevada Charter Academies d/b/a American Preparatory Academy – Las Vegas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA AMERICAN PREPARATORY SCHOOLS, Case Number: INC., a Utah Corporation, 2:20-cv-01205-JAD-NJK Plaintiff, vs. STIPULATION AND ORDER TO NEVADA CHARTER ACADEMIES d/b/a EXTEND TIME FOR FILING OF AMERICAN PREPARATORY ACADEMY— RESPONSES TO THIRD AMENDED LAS VEGAS, a Nevada Corporation, COMPLAINT RACHELLE HULET, an individual, AND Defendants.

STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS TO FINALIZE SETTLEMENT (FIFTH REQUEST) ECF Nos. 93, 96 Plaintiff American Preparatory Schools, Inc. (“Plaintiff”), by and through its counsel of record, the law firms of Parr Brown Gee & Loveless and the Takos Law Group, LTD., Defendant Nevada Charter Academies d/b/a American Preparatory Academy – Las Vegas (“APA”), by and through its counsel of record, the law firms of Lipson Neilson P.C. and Hayes Wakayama, and Defendant Rachelle Hulet (“Hulet”), by and through her counsel of record, the law firm of Hogan Hulet, (collectively the “Parties”), hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. On December 16, 2020, this Court filed an Order instructing the Plaintiff to file its Third Amended Complaint no later than December 18, 2020, and Defendants to file their responses to Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint by January 15, 2021 [ECF No. 82].

2. On December 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed its Third Amended Complaint [ECF No. 83].

3. On January 12, 2021, a Notice of Appearance of Co-Defense Counsel was filed noticing the appearance of the law firm of Hayes Wakayama as co-defense counsel for Defendant APA, together with the law firm of Lipson Neilson [ECF No. 84].

4. The Parties had agreed to extend the deadline for Defendants’ to file their responses to Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint for two weeks from January 15, 2021 up through and including January 29, 2021. [ECF 87].

5. The reason for the Parties’ requesting the third extension was they had recently engaged in meaningful resolution discussions, and the parties wished to conduct such negotiations without the complications that answers and counterclaims may have created.

6. It was accordingly in the best interest of all Parties not to publish the Defendants’ responses to the Third Amended Complaint at the time, and the Parties agreed that a two-week extension would allow for further productive settlement discussions. Therefore, the Parties agreed to extend the deadline from January 29, 2021 to February 12, 2021.

7. Thereafter, the parties agreed to extend the deadline in order to participate in private mediation, as reflected in the Fourth Stipulation and Order to Extend. [ECF #91 & 92].

8. On May 3, 2021 and May 4, 2021, the parties participated in private mediation with Hon. Judge Trevor L. Atkin (Ret.) at Advanced Resolution Management.

9. After two full days of mediation, the parties continued to negotiate with the assistance of Judge Adkin throughout this past week, into today.

10. Today, on the evening of May 12, 2021, the parties reached an agreement to resolve all claims asserted, and not yet asserted.

extensions will be granted; however, the parties are representing to this Court that the matter has resolved in principle.

12. The agreement is very complex insomuch as finalizing the agreement will require completion of due diligence to finalize the terms.

13. The due diligence will involve hiring additional parties to assist and finalize necessary transactions.

14. The parties desire to keep all issues confidential at this time given the nature of the claims.

15. Therefore, the parties request that this matter be stayed, entirely, in order to finalize the agreement for one hundred and twenty (120) days.

16. This is the fifth submission request for extension of time to file responses to Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint, and the first request to stay the entire proceeding.

IT IS SO STIPULATED Dated this 12th day of May, 2021 Dated this 12th day of May, 2021 TAKOS LAW GROUP, LTD. HAYES | WAKAYAMA By: /s/ Zachary P. Takos, Esq. By: /s/ Dale A. Hayes, Jr., Esq.

ZACHARY P. TAKOS, ESQ. DALE A. HAYES, JR., ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 11293 Nevada Bar No. 9056 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 300 LIANE K. WAKAYAMA, ESQ.

Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Nevada Bar No. 11313 JEREMY D. HOLMES, ESQ.

PARR BROWN GEE & LOVELESS Nevada Bar No. 14379 JONATHAN O. HAFEN, ESQ 4735 S. Durango Drive, Ste. 105 Admitted pro hac vice Las Vegas, Nevada 89147 CHAD S. PEHRSON, ESQ.

Admitted pro hac vice Attorneys for Defendant Nevada Charter STEPHEN C. MOURITSEN, ESQ. Academies d/b/a American Preparatory Admitted pro hac vice Academy – Las Vegas 101 South 200 East, Suite 700 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Attorneys for Plaintiff American Preparatory Schools, Inc.

5 Dated this 12™ day of May, 2021 Dated this 12" day of May, 2021 LIPSON NEILSON P.C. HOGAN HULET || By:_/s/Lisa J. Zastrow, Esq. By:_/s/ Kenneth E. Hogan, Esq.

JOSEPH P. GARIN, ESQ. KENNETH E. HOGAN, ESQ.

5 Nevada Bar No. 6653 Nevada Bar No. 10083 LISA J. ZASTROW, ESQ. 1140 N. Town Center, Ste. 200 6 Nevada Bar No. 9727 Las Vegas, Nevada 89144 7 9900 Covington Cross Drive, Suite 120 Las Vegas, Nevada 89144 Attorneys for Defendant Rachelle Hulet Attorneys for Defendant Nevada Charter 9 Academies d/b/a American Preparatory 10 Academy — Las Vegas 11 ORDER 3 Based on the parties' stipulation [ECF No. 96] and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that THIS ACTION IS STAYED for all purposes thorough September 9, 2021. £=8 14 || And because this action and all deadlines are stayed, the stipulation to extend time to respond to the third amended complaint [ECF No. 93] is DENIED as moot.

REE 1S Choe : 5 BS 16 U.S. District Judge Yerinifer Ax Dorsey A 7 Dated: May 13, 2021 = 18 H

Page 4