LG Electronics Mobile Comm U.S.A., Inc. et al v. Xiaowen et al

Filing 135

ORDER Granting 133 Joint Motion to Stay Discovery Pending Resolution of N&K Trading's Motion To Dismiss. It is ordered that discovery is stayed pending a ruling on N&K Trading, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss. The parties must contact the undersigneds chambers within three days of a ruling to discuss whether any dates and deadlines in the scheduling order need to be reset. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nita L. Stormes on 2/23/2017. (dxj)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 LG CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, 11 12 v. 13 HUANG XIAOWEN DBA TOP14 UUSHOP, et al., 15 Case No. 3:16-cv-1162-JLS-NLS ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY PENDING RESOLUTION OF N&K TRADING’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. No. 133) Defendants. 16 17 Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ and Defendant N&K Trading, Inc.’s Joint Motion 18 to Stay Discovery Pending Resolution of N&K Trading’s Motion to Dismiss. (Dkt. 19 No. 133.) N&K Trading argues a stay of discovery is warranted because the motion 20 to dismiss is potentially dispositive and, if granted, would dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims 21 against it. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiffs strongly disagree that N&K Trading’s motion has any 22 likelihood of success, but argues a stay is nonetheless warranted because it will 23 conserve the parties’ resources. (Id. at 3.) 24 Courts have broad discretionary power to control discovery. See Little v. City of 25 Seattle, 863 F.2d 681, 685 (9th Cir. 1988). A pending dispositive motion by itself is 26 not enough to justify a stay of discovery; however, stays may be appropriate when 27 jurisdiction, venue or immunity are at issue. Ciuffitelli v. Deloitte & Touche LLP, 28 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163546, *14-*16 (D. Or. Nov. 28, 2016). Courts may also Case No. 3:16-cv-1162-JLS-NLS 1 employ different methods and evaluate factors to determine whether a stay is 2 appropriate. See Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597, 602 (D. Nev. 2011). 3 In considering the parties’ arguments and evaluating factors relevant to the 4 present inquiry, the Court finds good cause to issue an order staying discovery. The 5 Court took a preliminary peek at N&K’s pending motion to dismiss, and notes that the 6 motion raises challenges to personal jurisdiction. Additionally, given Plaintiffs’ and 7 N&K’s representations that they are the only remaining active litigants in the case 8 because the rest have either defaulted or settled, a stay on discovery would not appear 9 to affect any other parties. A stay of discovery will also conserve the parties’ 10 resources, and Plaintiffs state they would not be prejudiced by a stay because they 11 may immediately resume discovery if N&K Trading’s motion is denied. 12 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the parties’ joint motion. It is ORDERED 13 that discovery is STAYED pending a ruling on N&K Trading, Inc.’s Motion to 14 Dismiss. The parties must contact the undersigned’s chambers within three days of a 15 ruling to discuss whether any dates and deadlines in the scheduling order need to be 16 reset. 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 23, 2017 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No. 3:16-cv-1162-JLS-NLS

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?