Argawal et al v. Oregon Mutual Insurance Company

Filing 85

THE COURT HEREBY DIRECTS that the Magistrate Judge conduct a settlement conference. THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that 52 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED without predjudice. Signed by Judge Lloyd D. George on 3/7/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DXS)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10

ARVIND and ALKA AGARWAL,

11

2:11-CV-1384-LDG-CWH

Plaintiffs,
ORDER

12

v.

13

OREGON MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.,

14

Defendant.

15
16

This case arises out defendant’s denial of plaintiffs’ claim under a business owners policy

17

following losses occasioned by vandalism and theft at an apartment building located in Las Vegas,

18

Nevada. Plaintiffs originally filed the case in California state court and it was removed to federal

19

court in the Northern District of California on May 13, 2011. On August 26, 2011, the case was

20

transferred to this court.

21

Following discovery management by the magistrate judge, including the approval of a

22

discovery extension, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, partial

23

summary judgment, on August 3, 2012, which plaintiffs opposed after the close of discovery by

24

asserting, in part, that certain evidence should be excluded because it was not produced during

25

discovery. On September 21, 2012, plaintiffs filed their omnibus discovery motion in which it

26

sought to compel defendant’s responses to various categories of discovery which plaintiffs

1

maintain had not been produced. On January 18, 2013, the magistrate judge issued a

2

comprehensive order denying plaintiffs’ omnibus discovery motion. Plaintiffs have not appealed

3

the magistrate judge’s order, and pending is the magistrate judge’s ruling on defendant’s affidavit

4

of expenses.

5

The court believes that, as the evidentiary record in this case has now been clarified by the

6

magistrate judge’s order, a settlement conference would be beneficial before the court addresses

7

the summary judgment motion, which was filed and briefed before the issuance of the order.

8

Accordingly,

9

THE COURT HEREBY DIRECTS that the magistrate judge conduct a settlement

10

conference in this matter, the schedule and location of which to be determined by the magistrate

11

judge.

12

THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that, in the interests of docket management and to

13

preserve the status quo until the settlement conference, defendant’s motion for summary judgment

14

or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment (#52) is DENIED without prejudice. Following

15

the outcome of the settlement conference, the court will reinstate defendant’s motion, if necessary.

16
17

Dated this ____ day of March, 2013.

18
19
20

________________________
Lloyd D. George
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
2