1 ROBERT T. EGLET, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 3402 9 || TRACY A. EGLET, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 6419 3 || DANIELLE C. MILLER, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 9127 4 || EGLET ADAMS 400 S. Seventh St., Suite 400 5 || Las Vegas, NV 89101 (702) 450-5400; Fax: (702) 450-5451 6 || eservice @egletlaw.com -and- 7 || MATTHEW L. SHARP, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 4746 8 || MATTHEW L. SHARP, LTD. 432 Ridge Street ? || Reno, NV 89501 10 (775) 324-1500; Fax: (775) 284-0675 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 D UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT B DISTRICT OF NEVADA 14 HABAKKUIA MALONE, RICHARD MOYER, 15 || individually and on behalf of all those similarly Case No.: 2:21-cv-00574-RFB-BNW J situated, 16 je] 17 Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND PROPOSED Vs. ORDER EXTENDING LL) 18 DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS DEPOSITORS INSURANCE COMPANY, TO FILE AMENDED 19 NATIONWIDE AFFINITY INSURANCE COMPLAINT 29 || COMPANY OF AMERICA, NATIONWIDE ASSURANCE COMPANY, NATIONWIDE 21 || GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY OF 22 || AMERICA, | NATIONWIDE = MUTUAL 23 || INSURANCE COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 10, 24 25 Defendants. 26 Plaintiffs HABAKKUIA MALONE and RICHARD MOYER (“Plaintiffs”), by an 7 through their counsel of record, Robert T. Eglet, Esq., Tracy A. Eglet, Esq., and Danielle C 28 Miller, Esq. of the law firm EGLET ADAMS and Matthew L. Sharp, Esq. of the law fir MATTHEW L. SHARP, LTD., and Defendants DEPOSITORS INSURANCE COMPANY

1 || NATIONWIDE AFFINITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, NATIONWIDI 2 || ASSURANCE COMPANY, NATIONWIDE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY 3 || NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, AND NATIONWIDE MUTUAI 4 || INSURANCE COMPANY (collectively, ““Nationwide”), by and through their counsel of record 5 || Richard C. Gordon, Esq. of the law firm SNELL & WILMER LLP, Michael H. Carpenter, Esq 6 || of the law firm of CARPENTER LIPPS & LELAND, LLP, and Aneca E. Lasley, Esq. of the lav 7 || firm ICE MILLER, for good cause shown, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 8 1. Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in the Eighth Judicial District Court for □□□□□ 9 || County, Nevada, Case No. A-21-829914-B. Nationwide removed this action to this Court o: WD 10 |} April 7, 2021. 11 2. On April 9, 2021, Nationwide moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint [ECF Nc 2 12 || 7] (the “Motion”). 13 3, Plaintiffs filed their Response to Nationwide’s Motion on May 4, 2021 [ECF Nc 14 |] 17). 15 4. Nationwide filed a Reply in support of the Motion on May 6, 2021. [ECF No. 18] 16 5, That on February 9, 2021, the Honorable Richard F. Boulware, II hear 17 || Nationwide’s Motion to Dismiss and dismissed with prejudice all claims except the breach o 18 || implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim, tortious bad faith claim, and the Deceptiv 19 || Trade Practices Act claim, which were dismissed without prejudice. The Court granted Plaintiff 20 || leave to file an Amended Complaint with respect to Plaintiffs’ claims that were dismissed withou 21 || prejudice on or before Friday, March 11, 2022 [ECF No. 29]. 22 6. Because the claims that were dismissed without prejudice must be pled □□□ 23 || particularity, Plaintiffs need additional time to review Plaintiffs’ e-mail correspondence, records 24 ||and bank statements going back at least two (2) years, to the beginning of the COVID-1' 25 || pandemic. Given how much time has passed and given the burden of pleading Plaintiffs’ claim 26 || with particularity, Plaintiffs need additional time to thoroughly review their records to obtain thi 27 || information. Plaintiffs will also have to request some of this information from third parties, whic! 28 || may take additional time.

1 7. Thus, the Parties hereby stipulate that Plaintiffs shall have an additional sixty (60 2 || days to file an Amended Complaint. 3 8. That Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint shall be due on or before May 11, 2022. 4 9, That Nationwide shall have an extension of thirty (30) days to file a Motion t 5 || Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. 6 10. The Parties agree that discovery remains stayed pending Plaintiffs filing ai 7 || Amended Complaint and resolution of Defendant’s anticipated Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs 8 || Amended Complaint. 9 11. In this District, requests to stay discovery may be granted when: (1) the pendin; DY 10 || motion is potentially dispositive; (2) the potentially dispositive motion can be decided withou 11 || additional discovery; and (3) the Court has taken a “preliminary peek” at the merits of th 12 || potentially dispositive motion. Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc.,

(D. Nev. 2011) 13 || In doing so, the court must consider whether the pending motion is potentially dispositive of th 14 || entire case, and whether that motion can be decided without additional discovery. See Federa 15 || Housing Finance Agency v. GR Investments LLC, Case No. 2:17-cv-03005-JAD-EJY □

|| 2798011 at *3 (D. Nev. May 29, 2020) (granting motion to stay discovery pending resolution o 17 || potentially dispositive motion for summary judgment); see also Mintun v. Experian Informatio 18 || Solutions, Inc., 2:19-cv-00033-JAD-NJK,

at **1-2 (D. Nev. May 15, 2019 19 (granting motion to stay discovery pending resolution of potentially dispositive motion t 20 || dismiss). 21 12. The Parties agree that Nationwide’s anticipated Motion to Dismiss raise 22 || potentially dispositive legal and jurisdictional defenses to Plaintiffs’ claims concernin: 23 || Nationwide’s auto insurance rates during the COVID pandemic. 24 13. Pending resolution of Nationwide’s anticipated Motion to Dismiss, the Partie 25 || agree and stipulate to a stay of discovery including, but not limited to, any discovery obligation 26 || set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and LR 26-1. The Parties are in agreement that a stay of discover’ 27 || 1s warranted at this time. Moreover, discovery is not required to resolve Nationwide’s anticipates 28 || Motion.

1 14. If the Court denies Nationwide’s Motion to Dismiss, in whole or in part, the Partie 2 || agree to submit a Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order within thirty (30) days after entry of th 3 |} Court’s Order on the Motion. 4 15. The Parties respectfully suggest that good cause exists to enter the stipulated sta 5 || of discovery to preserve judicial and party resources and based on application of the factors se 6 || forth in paragraph 11, above. 7 16. The Parties represent that this stipulation is sought in good faith, is not interpose 8 || for delay, and is not filed for an improper purpose. 9 DATED this 10th day of March, 2022. DATED this 10th day of March, 2022. 10 Y EGLET ADAMS SNELL & WILMER LLP 11 12 Robert T. Eglet, Esq. __ /s/ Richard C. Gordon, Esq. QO ROBERT T. EGLET, ESQ. RICHARD C. GORDON, ESQ. 13 || Nevada Bar No. 3402 Nevada Bar No. 9036 < DANIELLE C. MILLER, ESQ. 3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Ste. 1100 14 || Nevada Bar No. 9127 Las Vegas, NV 89169 TRACY A. EGLET, ESQ. -and- 400S.S th St., Suite 400 CARPENTER LIPPS & LELAND, LLP. 16 || Fog Vecas NV 80101. 280 North High Street _ eas, 1 Suite 1300 17 “ana Columbus, OH 43215 MATTHEW L. SHARP, ESQ. and. fob 18 |! Nevada Bar No. 4746 ANECA E. LASLEY, ESQ. 19 || MATTHEW L. SHARP, LTD. ICE MILLER 432 Ridge Street Arena District 250 West Street 1 Suite 700 20 eno, Nw for Plain tiffs Columbus, OH 43215-7509 2] y Attorneys for the Nationwide Defendants 22 ORDER 23 Based upon the Parties’ stipulation and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, I" 24 Il Ts SO ORDERED: 29 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 eclawthey UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 DATED: __ March 11 , 2022 28