1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3}| Lorelie Totanes, Case No.: 2:23-cv-01681-CDS-DJA 4 Plaintiff Order Granting Joint Motion for Settlement Conference and Joint Motion to Stay S|} V. 6]| Target Corporation, [ECF Nos. 57, 58] 7 Defendant 8 9 The parties jointly seek to schedule a settlement conference and move to stay all deadlines, specifically the joint pretrial order deadline, pending the outcome of the settlement 11|| conference.! Mot., ECF No. 57. The parties argue that, in the interest of resolution, good cause 12]| exists to stay this case to allow them the opportunity to potentially settle their claims. Id. at 2. B “The purpose of a settlement conference is to facilitate a settlement or to narrow the 14|| disparity between the parties by the candid input of a neutral, disinterested judicial officer.” 15|| Pitman v. Brinker Int’l, Inc.,

(D. Ariz. 2003). Here, I expect that, where the 16]| parties have requested a settlement conference, they intend to engage in good faith negotiations 17|| to settle the matter. For that reason, the parties’ joint motions [ECF Nos. 57, 58] are 18|| GRANTED. 19 This matter is referred to the magistrate judge for a settlement conference. All pending 20]| deadlines are vacated. If settlement efforts fail, the parties myst submit a proposed joint pretrial 21}| order within thirty days of the completed settlement copherghce 22 Dated: December 3, 2025 LZ

23 Ae 34 Cristi aD. Silva . itéd States District Judge /

' The parties properly filed the motion twice seeking two forms of relief. ECF No. 57; ECF No. 58. For ease of the record, I refer to the first filed only.