Williams v. Gold Coast Hotel and Casino et al

Filing 58

ORDER Denying 56 Plaintiff's Motion for Standard Discovery Plan and Request for Waiver of Filing Discovery Plan. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 55 Proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall initiate scheduling conference by 5/2/12. The parties shall file a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order within 14 days after the completion of the conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 4/17/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
SOFIA A. WILLIAMS,
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
GOLD COAST HOTEL AND CASINO, et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:11-cv-02112-KJD-CWH
ORDER

16
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Standard Discovery Plan and Request
17
for Waiver of Filing Discovery Plan (#56), filed April 16, 2012, and Defendants’ Proposed Discovery
18
Plan and Scheduling Order (#55), filed April 16, 2012.
19
Pursuant to Local Rule (“LR”) 26-1(d), Plaintiff is required to initiate the Rule 26(f) meeting
20
within thirty days after the first defendant answers or otherwise appears. Within fourteen days after the
21
Rule 26(f) conference, the parties must submit a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order.
22
Plaintiff has not complied with the requirement to initiate the Rule 26(f) meeting. The parties have not
23
complied with the foregoing rules. Moreover, the parties competing discovery plans and scheduling
24
orders do not comply with LR 26-1(e). Plaintiff is not relieved of the obligation to comply with the
25
Local Rules by virtue of her pro se status. Plaintiff is instructed to initiate the Rule 26(f) conference
26
within fourteen (14) days of this order and, subsequently, the parties are instructed to file a stipulated
27
discovery plan and scheduling order as required by the Local Rules. The failure to participate “in good
28
faith in developing and submitting a proposed discovery plan as required by Rule 26(f)” is grounds for

1

monetary sanctions.

2

Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing therefore,

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Standard Discovery Plan and Request

4
5
6
7

for Waiver of Filing Discovery Plan (#56) is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling
Order (#55) is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall initiate the required Rule 26(f) scheduling

8

conference by May 2, 2012. The parties are instructed to file a stipulated discovery plan and

9

scheduling order within fourteen (14) days after completion of the Rule 26(f) conference.

10

Dated this 17th day of April, 2012.

11
12
13

___________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2