Jocelyn Silvano v. Circa Hospitality Group III LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, dba Circa Resort & Casino

1 □ □□□ DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC 2 || Cynthia L. Alexander, Esq. 3 Nevada Bar No. 6718 Luis E. Montanez, Esq. 4 || Nevada Bar No. 16281 3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 800 5 ||Las Vegas, NV 89169 Tel: 702-550-4400 6 || Fax: 844-670-6009 7 Email: CAlexander@ dickinson-wright.com Email: LMontanez @dickinson-wright.com g || Attorneys for Circa Hospitality Group II, LLC Dba Circa Resort & Casino 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA [12] % = 13 || JOCELYN SILVANO, an individual, Case No.: 2-24-cv-01712-RFB-MDC [234] = Z Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER TC = % 15 EXTEND DISCOVERY SCHEDULING 6 v. ORDER DEADLINES [2] % CIRCA HOSPITALITY GROUP III LLC, a (THIRD REQUEST) “ 17 || Nevada limited liability company, dba CIRCA 8 RESORT & CASINO; 19 Defendant. [21] 22 Plaintiff Jocelyn Silvano (“Plaintiff’), by and through her counsel, the law firm of, 23 || Greenberg Gross LLP, and Defendant Circa Hospitality Group III LLC (“Defendant”) by and 24 || through its counsel of record, the law firm of Dickinson Wright, PLLC., hereby stipulate and agree 25 || to extend the unexpired discovery deadlines for ninety (90) days. 26 | /// 27 Ht /// 28 | /// 1]. STATEMENT OF DISCOVERY COMPLETED: 2 1. The Parties have exchanged initial disclosure of documents and witnesses 3 pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(1) 4 2. Plaintiff has served three supplements to its FRCP 26 disclosure. 5 3. Defendant has served six supplements to its FRCP 26 disclosure. 6 4. Plaintiff served Defendant written discovery on January 29, 2025, and responses and objections were received on March 21, 2025. 7 a. Defendant’s Supplemental responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents were received on July 11, 2025. 8 b. Defendant’s Second Supplemental responses to Plaintiff’s Request for 9 Production of Documents were received on August 27, 2025. 10 6. The parties stipulated to a HIPAA Qualified Protective Order, which was accepted and entered by the Court on March 31, 2024 [ECF No. 29]. [11] s 12 7. Defendant issued subpoenas to third parties and some, but not all, of the g 2 43 requested documents were received. 14 8. Defendant served Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents on May 9, = Z 2025 and Defendant received Plaintiff's Reponses to Request for Production of 15 Documents on June 9, 2025. zg a 16 9. Plaintiff's took the deposition of Ben Seligman on August 28, 2025. [17] 10. _—— Plaintiffs filed their Initial Designation of Expert Witnesses pursuant to FRCP 18 26(a)(2) on September 23, 2025 [ECF No. 35]. 19 11. | Defendant took the deposition of Plaintiff Jocelyn Silvano on October 7, 2025. 20 || ID. DESCRIPTION OF REMAINING DISCOVERY TO BE COMPLETED: 21 1. Plaintiff intends to depose additional witnesses. 22 2. Plaintiff may conduct additional written discovery. 23 3. Defendant may conduct additional written discovery. 24 4. Defendant intends to depose additional fact and expert witnesses. 25 5. Defendant has yet to receive all third party responses to subpoenas. 26 6. Defendant may need to subpoena additional third-parties. 27 || /// 28 || /// 1 | 1. REASONS WHY DISCOVERY NOT COMPLETED WITHIN PRIOR TIME LIMITS: 3 On August 29, 2025, Plaintiff's counsel contacted Defendant to schedule the deposition of 4 || former employee of Defendant, Miranda Khounphithack, for the week of September 8, 2025. On 5 || September 3, 2025, Defendant spoke with Ms. Khounphithack and learned that she had given birth 6 || the previous day and had just been released from the hospital. Ms. Khounphithack is currently on 7 || parental leave and has been experiencing health issues since giving birth. She will thus be 8 || unavailable until February 2026. On September 5, 2025, Defendant informed Plaintiff of Ms. 9 || Khounphithack’s unavailability for the deposition. To accommodate Ms. Khounphithack’s 10 || parental leave and recent health concerns, a ninety (90) day extension of the discovery deadline is 11 |} requested. 12 Additionally, in the prior Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Second 13 |} Request) [ECF No. 32], the Dispositive Motion deadline was mistakenly listed as October 24, : 14 |} 2025. The correct deadline should have been December 24, 2025, which is 30 days after the 4 15 || discovery cut-off date of November 24, 2025. In turn, the Pre-Trial Disclosure date was mistakenly i 2 16 || listed as November 24, 2024, when it should have been 30 days after the Dispositive Motion 17 || deadline of December 24, 2025. The present stipulation corrects those errors. 18 || IV. GOOD CAUSE TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO EXTEND THE DEADLINES AS SET FORTH HEREIN: [19] 20 When a stipulation requires the modification of the scheduling order, the parties must first 21 satisfy the “good cause” standard established by Rule 16(b). See Johnson v. Mammoth 22 || Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule 23 || may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent”). The good cause inquiry is 24 || focused on the movant’s reasons for seeking to modify the scheduling order and primarily 25 considers the movant’s diligence. In re W. States Wholesale Nat. Gas Antitrust Litig., 715 F.3d 26 || 716, 737 (9th Cir. 2013). The key determination is whether the subject deadline “cannot 27 || reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Johnson, 975 F.2d at 28 || 609. The Court considers whether relief from the scheduling order is sought based on the 1 development of matters that could not have been reasonably anticipated at the time the schedule 2 was established. Jackson v. Laureate, Inc., 186 F.R.D. 605, 608 (E.D. Cal. 1999). Courts may 3 || also consider other pertinent circumstances, including whether the movant was diligent in seeking 4 || modification of the scheduling order once it became apparent that the movant required relief from 5 || the deadline at issue. Sharp v. Covenant Care LLC, 288 F.R.D. 465, 467 (S.D. Cal. 2012). “The 6 || diligence obligation is ongoing” such that parties must “diligently attempt to adhere to [the 7 deadlines in the scheduling order] throughout the subsequent course of the litigation.” Jd. 8 Good cause exists to extend the Discovery Cut-Off, Dispositive Motions, and Pretrial Order 9 || Deadlines. As explained in Section III supra, Ms. Khounphithack has recently given birth, is on 10 || parental leave, and has been experiencing health issues following the birth of her child. 11 Considering the foregoing, the parties are unable to complete discovery before the original 12 || discovery deadline. 13 || V. PROPOSED DISCOVERY AND DISPOSITIVE MOTION SCHEDULE: : 14 It is hereby stipulated that the close of discovery be extended for a period of ninety (90) 4 15 || days from the November 24, 2025 date for the purpose of completing the remaining necessary i 4 16 || discovery set forth above. If approved, the discovery dates and deadlines and the Discovery 17 || Scheduling Order would be modified as follows: [18] ° [24] 25 The Parties submit that these circumstances satisfy the required good cause in extending the 26 deadlines referenced above. /// [28] 1 The Parties hereby stipulate to the aforementioned. DATED this 22nd day of October, 2025. DATED this 22nd day of October, 2025. DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC GREENBERG GROSS LLP /s/ Cynthia Alexander /s/ David C. Kiebler 5 Cynthia L. Alexander, Esq. Jemma E. Dunn, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6718 Nevada Bar No. 16229 6 Luis Montanez, Esq. Matthew T. Hale, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 16281 Nevada Bar No. 16210 7 3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 800 David C. Kiebler, Esq. Las Vegas, NV 89169 Nevada Bar No. 16724 8 Telephone: (702) 550-4400 1980 Festival Drive, Suite 730 Attorneys for Defendant Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 9 Circa Hospitality Group HI, LLC Telephone: (702) 777-0888 Dba Circa Resort & Casino Attorneys for Plaintiff Jocelyn Silvano [12] 42 13 Es ORDER “p 4 a □ IT IS SO ORDEREDY 0" 7 a 4 uf a □□ UNITEEXSTATES MAGWTRATE JUDG 19 Keep: 10/24/25 fp [28] Michelle Choto From: David C. Kiebler <dkiebler@ggTriallaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2025 2:31 PM o: Nilou Soltani <NSoltani@dickinson-wright.com>; Luis E. Montanez <LMontanez@dickinson-wright.com>; Cynthia L. Alexander <CAlexander@dickinson-wright.com> Cc: Joshua W. Daor <JDaor@GGTrialLaw.com>; Matthew T. Hale <MHale@GGTrialLaw.com> Subject: RE: Silvano/Circa - Proposed Stip and Order to Extend Discovery This is good to file. You may sign for me. Thanks, david David C. Kiebler Counsel | Greenberg Gross LLP One Summerlin | 1980 Festival Plaza Drive | Suite 730 | Las Vegas, NV 89135 Direct 702.777.0850 | Main 702.777.0888 dkiebler@GGTrialLaw.com