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)

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