Quimby v. Stevens

— 1 — — 2 — — 3 — — 4 — 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA — 7 — RUTH QUIMBY, 8 Case No. 2:19-cv-02181-JCM-NJK Plaintiff, 9 Order v. 10 [Docket Nos. 44, 45] MICHAEL STEVENS, et al., Defendants. — 12 — 13 Pending before the Court are Defendants’ motions to set witness fees for the depositions 14] of Dr. Thomas Vater and Dr. Firooz Mashhood. Docket Nos. 44, 45. No response was filed. See Docket. Accordingly, the motions are properly granted as unopposed. See Local Rule 7-2(d). 16 Although Defendants submit that the hourly rates of the witnesses are unreasonable, they 17] fail to submit points and authorities to support their request for reasonable rates. See Docket Nos. 18] 44, 45. The Court declines to determine specific rates without such information. See Kor Media 191 Group, LLC v. Green, 297 F.R.D. 579 , 582 n.3 (Courts only consider well developed arguments). 20 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motions. Docket Nos. 44, 45. Defendants 21] must file a motion for the Court to calculate reasonable expert witness fees, addressing the 22|| appropriate factors and case law, no later than November 16, 2021. Plaintiff's response and any 23] reply will be briefed according to the Court’s default briefing schedule. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: November 2, 2021 26 LAN E— ey Nancy J.Koppe\ 27 United States.Magistrate Judge — 28 —