1 |} ROBERT W. FREEMAN Nevada Bar No. 3062 2 || E-Mail: [email protected] JENNIFER A. TAYLOR 3 || Nevada Bar No. 6141 E-Mail: [email protected] 4 || LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600 5 || Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 702.893.3383 6 || FAX: 702.893.3789 Attorneys for Defendant 7 || USAA Casualty Insurance Company 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 1] 1] keiek 12 || JULIA MARTINEZ, an individual, CASE NO.: 2:24-cv-01290-GMN-BNW 13 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 4 EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES vs. 15 [SECOND REQUEST] USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE 16 || COMPANY, a foreign insurance company; DOES I through X; ROE ENTITIES I through 17 || X, 18 Defendants. 19 20 Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of 21 || record, hereby stipulate and request that this Court extend discovery in the above-captioned case by 22 || ninety (90) days, up to and including Monday, August 4, 2025. In addition, the parties request that 23 || all other future deadlines contemplated by the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order be extended 24 || pursuant to Local Rule. In support of this Stipulation and Request, the parties state as follows: 25 1. On June 7, 2024, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in the District Court, Clark County, 26 Nevada. 27 2. On July 17, 2024, Defendant removed the case to the United States District Court. 28 3. On July 24, 2024, Defendant filed its Answer to Complaint.

1 4. On September 6, 2024 the parties conducted an initial FRCP 26(f) conference 2 5. On September 9, 2024, the Court entered the Stipulated Discovery Order. 3 6. On September 10, 2024, Defendant served its FRCP 26 Initial Disclosures on 4 Defendant. 5 7. On September 18, 2024, Plaintiff served her FRCP 26 Initial Disclosures on Plaintiff. 6 8. On October 1, 2024, Defendant served Subpoenas to Plaintiff's medical providers. 7 9. On October 2, 2024, Plaintiff served written discovery on Defendant. Defendant 8 served its responses on November 22, 2024. 9 10. On December 9, 2024, Plaintiff served a meet and confer letter regarding certain of 10 the defendant’s responses. The parties discussed the meet and confer letter via a 11 phone call shortly before Defendant’s lead trial counsel started a three week trial and 12 was already mired in pre-trial preparation for the same. 13 10. On December 16, 2024, Defendant served written discovery on Plaintiff. Plaintiff 14 served her responses on February 3, 2025. 15 DISCOVERY REMAINING 16 1. The parties will continue participating in written discovery. 17 2. Defendant will take the deposition of Plaintiff. 18 3. Plaintiff will depose Defendant’s FRCP 30(b)(6) designee 19 4. Plaintiff may depose individual adjuster, supervisor, and/or manager employees of 20 Defendant 21 3. Defendant will gather records/documents pertinent to Plaintiffs claim. 22 4. The parties may take the depositions of any and all other witnesses garnered through 23 discovery. 24 5. The parties will retain and disclose initial and rebuttal experts. 25 6. The parties will depose the respective expert witnesses. 26 WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED 27 The parties aver, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, that good cause exists for the following 28 || requested extension. A standard of “good cause” governs. D. Nev. Local Rule 26-3. Good cause

1 || “primarily considers the diligence” of the parties seeking the extension.'! “Motions for extension 2 || must include a statement specifying the discovery completed, a description of discovery remaining, 3 || the reasons why the deadline was not satisfied, and a proposed schedule for completing remaining discovery.”* In addition, requests made after the expiration of the subject deadline must also 5 || demonstrate that the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect. Dev. Nev. Local Rule 26-3. 6 || “[D]istrict Courts...retain broad discretion to control their dockets....”° 7 The parties have been diligent in moving the case forward: participating in a reasonable 8 ||amount of discovery, including exchanging their initial lists of witnesses and documents; 9 || propounding written discovery requests and preparing responses thereto; records procurement; and 10 || preparing for Plaintiff's and State Farm’s representatives depositions. 11 Defendant was planning to conduct the deposition of Plaintiff at the end of January 2025, 12 || however, discovery that was planned to be conducted in January needed to be rescheduled. This 13 || was because Defendant’s lead trial counsel was preparing for and participated in a three-week jury 14 || trial in case Timothy Kuhn v. USAA (case number: A-20-821602-C), which commenced before the 15 || Honorable Judge Gloria Sturman on January 28, 2025. Additionally, Defendant has requested 16 || medical and billing records from Plaintiffs medical providers, and is still waiting to receive 17 || Plaintiff's medical and billing records from one of Plaintiff's medical providers. 18 Moreover, the meet and confer efforts regarding Defendant’s responses to written discovery 19 || have not been able to move forward for the same reasons, with counsel for the parties unable to 20 || conclude their meet and confer efforts before there is any reasonable potential for a discovery 21 || motion. The parties are working diligently to avoid such a motion, and expect that it will be resolved 22 ||soon. Yet the resolution of the same precluded Plaintiff from setting the depositions of Defendant 23 || employee witnesses during this timeframe. 24 25 ||| Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1992) (explaining that □□□□□□ district court may modify the pretrial schedule if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence 26 || of the parties seeking the extension.”) (internal quotations omitted). ee v. Nevada, No. 2:20-cv-00578-APG-DJA,

, at *2 (D. Nev. July 29,

28 . Stahrokhiv. Harter, No. 2:21-cv-01126-RFB-NJK,

, at *4 (D.Nev.

] The parties are also continuing their good faith discussions to resolve this matter short of 2 || trial. Pushing out all deadlines, particularly the expensive retention of experts by both sides, would 3 || foster such settlement discussions and make them more likely to be fruitful in disposing of this 4 || matter in its entirety. 5 The parties submit that good cause and excusable neglect exist for an additional extension 6 || of the discovery deadlines. 7 Additionally, pursuant to Local Rule 26-4, that good cause exists for the following requested 8 || extension. This Request for an extension of time is not sought for any improper purpose or other 9 || purpose of delay. Rather, it is sought by the parties solely for the purpose of allowing sufficient 10 || time to conduct discovery. 11 Extension or Modification of The Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-4 governs 12 |} modifications or extension of the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. Any stipulation or motion 13 || to extend or modify that Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order must be made no later than twenty- 14 || one (21) days before the expiration of the subject deadline and must comply fully with LR 26-4. 15 This stipulation is not made more than twenty-one (21) days before the expiration of any 16 || deadlines. Additionally, good cause exists for extending discovery as the parties have timely 17 || submitted their request and have acted in good faith in attempting to comply with the discovery 18 || deadlines. Further, the parties have not purposefully procrastinated or caused undue delay but 19 || continue to diligently pursue discovery in this matter. Various discovery remains to be completed 20 || and additional time is respectfully requested in order for the parties to be able to complete this 21 || discovery, as outlined above. The parties are working together to conduct the deposition of Plaintiff. 22 For the reasons set forth above, the parties respectfully submit that good cause and excusable 23 || neglect supports their requested supplemental stipulation for a ninety (90) day extension of the 24 || below discovery deadlines. This brief delay will not impede this matter, and in fact, will assist by 25 || allowing the parties to engage in a resolution process through mediation before conducting 26 || additional discovery, and filing dispositive motions in this matter. 27 This is the Second request for extension of time in this matter. The parties respectfully 28 || submit that the reasons set forth above constitute compelling reasons for the short extension.

1 CURRENT AND PROPOSED DISCOVERY DEADLINES 2 The following is a list of the current discovery deadlines and the parties’ proposed extended 3 || deadlines: 4 Scheduled Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline 6 Discovery Cut-off Monday, May 5, 2025 Monday, August 4, 2025 Deadline to Amend Closed Closed 7 Pleadings or Add Parties Expert Disclosure Friday, March 7, 2025 Thursday, June 5, 2025 9 pursuant to FRCP26 (a)(2) 10) | Rebuttal Expert Monday, April 7, 2025 Monday, July 7, 2025 11 Disclosure pursuant to FRCP. 26(a)(2) 12 Wednesday, June 4, 2025 Tuesday, September 2, 2025 13 Joint Pretrial Order Friday, July 4, 2024 Thursday, October 2, 2025 14 WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this Court extend the discovery period 15 || by ninety (90) days from the current deadline of May 5, 2025, up to and including Monday, August 16 || 4, 2025, and the other dates as outlined in accordance with the table above. || Dated this 25th day of February, 2025 Dated this 25th day of February, 2025 18 || THE BIG GUNS INJURY ATTORNEYS LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP 19 /s/ Benjamin J. Carman /s/ Jennifer A. Taylor 20 || BENJAMIN J. CARMAN ROBERT W. FREEMAN Nevada Bar No. 12565 Nevada Bar No. 3062 4045 Spencer Street, Suite A52 JENNIFER A. TAYLOR Las Vegas, NV 89119 Nevada Bar No. 6141 || Attorney for Plaintiff 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 23 Attorneys for Defendant USAA Casualty Insurance Company 25 ORDER 2% IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 KK gn le WOE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 DATED: February 26, 2025