Alvarez et al v. Diversified Maintenance Systems, LLC et al

Filing 52

ORDER granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay Pending Review of Magistrate Judge's Pretrial Order 49 . Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiff's objections by Friday, July 13, 2012. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Susan Richard Nelson on 07/09/2012. (jmf)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Marco A. Alvarez, et al.,

Civil No. 11-CV-3106 (SRN/TNL)

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

Diversified Maintenance Systems, LLC, et al.
Defendants,
______________________________________________________________________________
David H. Redden and Nicholas G. B. May, Fabian, May & Anderson, PLLP, 1625 Medical Arts
Building, 825 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402; Margaret O’Sullivan Kane, Kane
Education Law, LLC, 1654 Grand Avenue, Suite 200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105; Michael B.
Healey, Michael Healey Law, LLC, 1654 Grand Avenue, Suite 200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105,
Adam W. Hansen, Paul J. Lukas and Timothy C. Selander, Nichols Kaster, PLLP, 80 South
Eighth Street, Suite 4600, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, for Plaintiffs.
Andrea D. Kiehl, Phillip B. Russell and Ashlee M. Bekish, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak &
Stewart, PC, 90 South Seventh Street, Suite 3800, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, for
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, United States District Judge
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay Pending Review of the Magistrate Judge’s
Pretrial Order [Doc. No. 49]. Plaintiffs seek an order granting a stay of the proceedings until this
Court has the opportunity to review their appeal of Magistrate Judge Leung’s Order of July 3,
2012 [Doc. No. 47]. The July 3 Order requires Plaintiffs to produce certain discovery on or
before July 9, 2012. On July 6, 2012, Plaintiffs filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s

1

Pretrial Order [Doc. No. 48], pursuant to Local Rule 72(a), and also filed the instant motion
seeking a stay.
The Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion to stay. Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiffs’
Objections by Friday, July 13, 2012.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay Pending Review of Magistrate Judge’s Pretrial Order
[Doc. No. 49] is GRANTED; and

2.

Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiff’s Objections by Friday, July 13, 2012.

.

Dated: July 9, 2012
s/Susan Richard Nelson
SUSAN RICHARD NELSON
United States District Court Judge

2