STEINBUCH v. CUTLER
Consent MOTION to Stay Discovery by ANA MARIE COX. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Handman, Laura)
STEINBUCH v. CUTLER
Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROBERT STEINBUCH, Plaintiff, v. JESSICA CUTLER and ANA MARIE COX, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Civil Action No. 1:05cv970 (PLF) (JMF)
CONSENT MOTION FOR STAY OF DISCOVERY Defendant Ana Marie Cox ( Cox ) hereby moves for a stay of discovery in this case pending the Court s ruling on her Motion to Dismiss. On May 16, 2005, Plaintiff Robert Steinbuch ( Plaintiff ) filed his original Complaint, naming Defendant Jessica Cutler ( Cutler ) as the sole defendant. On July 9, 2006, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend his Complaint in order to add Cox as a defendant, and the Court granted his motion on October 30, 2006. Cox was served on January 6, 2007. On January 26, 2007, Cox filed her Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Cox requests that this Court stay all discovery with respect to her until the Court has decided her Motion to Dismiss. Because the motion may result in the dismissal of Plaintiff s claims against Cox in their entirety, it would unfairly prejudice Cox to impose the time and costs of discovery on her before the motion is resolved. It could also waste the other parties resources to take potentially unnecessary discovery and which require the Court s intervention should disputes arise concerning such discovery
it would squander judicial resources as well.
Page 2 of 4
Counsel for Cox has consulted with counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for Cutler, who have consented to this motion. Counsel for Plaintiff has authorized us to state that he consents to a stay of all proceedings; counsel for Cutler has authorized us to state that Cutler consents to a stay of discovery, but not of the briefing and disposition of Cutler s pending motion. In sum, all parties are in agreement that discovery should be stayed pending resolution of this motion and the disagreement between the other two parties regarding the scope of the stay is immaterial for purposes of this stay motion.
Dated this 26th day of January, 2007. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Laura R. Handman Laura R. Handman (D.C. Bar No. 444386) Amber L. Husbands (D.C. Bar No. 481565) DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 1500 K Street, N.W., Suite 450 Washington, D.C. 20005-1272 (202) 508-6600 (202) 508 6699 fax James Rosenfeld (pro hac vice application pending) DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 1633 Broadway, 27th Floor New York, N.Y. 10019 (212) 489-8230 (212) 489-8340 fax Charles R. Both (D.C. Bar No. 42424) Law Offices of Charles R. Both 1666 Connecticut Avenue Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 833-9060 (202) 463-6686 (fax) Attorneys for Defendant Ana Marie Cox
Page 3 of 4
STATEMENT OF CONSENT Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.1(m), undersigned counsel hereby states that the required discussion with counsel for plaintiff occurred on January 25, 2007, and that counsel for Plaintiff does not oppose this motion. The required discussion with counsel for Defendant Cutler occurred on January 24, 2007, and counsel for Cutler does not oppose this motion.
/s/ James Rosenfeld James Rosenfeld
Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on January 26, 2007, I caused the foregoing to be served electronically on counsel of record by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Electronic Document Filing System (ECF).
/s/ Amber L. Husbands Amber L. Husbands
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?