U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. DTG Las Vegas, LLC ( 2024 )

1 TRAVIS F. CHANCE, ESQ., Nevada Bar No. 13800 tchance@bhfs.com 2 EMILY L. DYER, ESQ., Nevada Bar No. 14512 edyer@bhfs.com 3 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP 100 North City Parkway, Suite 1600 4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89106 Telephone: 702.382.2101 5 Facsimile: 702.382.8135 6 RICHARD ROSENBERG, ESQ. (admitted pro hac vice) rrosenberg@brgslaw.com 7 DAVID FISHMAN, ESQ. (admitted pro hac vice) dfishman@brgslaw.com 8 ALEXIS CIRKINYAN, ESQ. (admitted pro hac vice) acirkinyan@brgslaw.com 9 BALLARD ROSENBERG GOLPER & SAVITT, LLP 15760 Ventura Boulevard, 18th Floor 10 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: 818.508.3700 11 Attorneys for Defendants DTG Las Vegas, LLC; 12 Fifth Street Gaming, LLC; and DTG Las Vegas Manager, LLC dba Downtown Grand Hotel & Casino 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 16 17 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT CASE NO.: 2:23-cv-00510-APG-NJK OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, 18 Plaintiff, 19 vs. JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 20 CONTINUING STAY OF ACTION DTG LAS VEGAS, LLC; FIFTH STREET PENDING FINAL TERMS OF CONSENT 21 GAMING, LLC; AND DTG LAS VEGAS DECREE MANAGER, LLC dba DOWNTOWN 22 GRAND HOTEL & CASINO, and DOES 1- 10, inclusive, 23 Defendants. 24 25 26 / / / 27 / / / 1 Plaintiff United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Plaintiff” or 2 “EEOC”) and Defendants DTG Las Vegas, LLC, DTG Las Vegas Manager, LLC, and Fifth Street 3 Gaming, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) (Defendants and Plaintiffs collectively, “the Parties”), 4 by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 5 1. On August 11, 2023, the Parties submitted a First Amended Stipulation and Order 6 requesting the Court temporarily stay the action pending mediation. (ECF No. 22). 7 2. On August 15, 2023, the Honorable Nancy J. Koppe, United States Magistrate Judge, 8 granted the Parties’ request and stayed the action until November 15, 2023. (ECF No. 9 24). 10 3. Per Judge Koppe’s Order, the Parties were to file a Joint Status Report by November 15, 11 2023. (ECF No. 24). 12 4. The Parties attended private, in-person Mediation with Sonya D. Goodwin on November 13 8, 2023 and settled the monetary portion of the action. 14 5. On November 15, 2023, the Parties submitted a Joint Status Report updating the Court 15 of the successful mediation, informing the Court that the Parties were in the process of 16 finalizing the terms of a Consent Decree, and requesting an additional stay of 45 days. 17 (EFC No. 27) 18 6. On November 16, 2023, the Honorable Nancy J. Koppe, United States Magistrate Judge, 19 granted the requested stay which was extended to January 2, 2024. (Docket Entry No. 20 28) 21 7. On January 2, 2024, the Parties submitted a Joint Stipulation and Order requesting the 22 Court continue to stay the action for 45 days to allow the parties to finalize the terms of 23 the Consent Decree. (Docket Entry No. 29) 24 8. On January 3, 2024, the Honorable Nancy J. Koppe, United States Magistrate Judge, 25 granted the requested stay which was extended to February 16, 2024. (Docket Entry No. 26 30) 27 9. The Parties have been and continue to be diligently working to finalize the terms of the 1 Parties expect the Consent Decree will be finalized and submitted to the Court for review 2 and approval within the next 15 days. 3 10. To allow the Parties time to finalize the terms of a Consent Decree, the Parties hereby 4 stipulate and agree that all court proceedings and deadlines, including the requirements 5 of LR 26-1 and FRCP 26(a)(1), should be stayed for an additional 30 days. 6 11. The Court has the power to continue to stay the proceedings as part of its inherent power 7 “to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort 8 for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936). 9 In deciding whether to grant a stay, a court may weigh the “competing interests of the 10 parties and of the Court.” Coker v. Dowd, No. 2:13-CV-0994-JCM-NJK, 2013 WL 11 12216682, at *1 (D. Nev. July 8, 2013). The competing interests that may be considered 12 include “the possible damage which may result from the granting of a stay, the hardship 13 or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward, and the orderly 14 course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, 15 and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.” CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 16 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962). 17 12. The Parties submit that the competing interests weigh in favor of continuing the stay. 18 The stay will promote judicial economy and allow this Court to more effectively control 19 the disposition of the cases on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for 20 counsel, and the litigants. Given that this case has settled pending the Parties finalizing 21 the terms of a Consent Decree and no deadlines or trial date have been set supports a 22 continuation of the stay to allow the Parties an opportunity to finalize the terms of a 23 Consent Decree and submit it to the Court for review and approval. This will save the 24 Parties from having to incur additional, potentially unnecessary litigation costs. 25 13. This stipulation is entered in good faith, is reasonably necessary, and is not sought for 26 the purposes of delay. 27 / / / ] 14. This is the Parties’ fifth request to stay this proceeding. 2 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 3 || Respectfully submitted, 5 || DATED: February 15, 2024 DATED: February 15, 2024 BY:_/s/ Taylor Markey BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP 7 BY:_/s/ Travis F. Chance Taylor Markey 8 || EEOC Assistant Regional Attorney Travis F. Chance, Esq., NV Bar No. 13800 tchance@bhfs.com 9 || Attorney for Plaintiff Emily L. Dyer, Esq., NV Bar No. 14512 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT edyer@bhfs.com 10 || OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 100 North City Parkway, Suite 1600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89106 11 BY: _/s/ David Fishman 12 David Fishman, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice) 13 dfishman@brgslaw.com Richard Rosenberg, Esq. (admitted pro hac 14 vice) rrosenberg@brgslaw.com 15 Alexis Cirkinyan, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice) 16 acirkinyan@brgslaw.com BALLARD ROSENBERG GOLPER & 17 SAVITT, LLP 15760 Ventura Boulevard, 18 Floor 18 Encino, CA 91436 19 Attorneys for Defendants DTG Las Vegas, LLC, Fifth Street Gaming, LLC, and DTG 20 || The stipulation at Docket No. 32 is Las Vegas Manager, LLC dba Downtown GRANTED. The stipulation at Grant Hotel & Casino Docket No. 31 is DENIED as moot. 22 ORDER 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 UNITED STATES. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 4 Dated: February 20, 2024 28 2333725.1