Gaines v. Cox et al

Filing 17

ORDER Denying 16 Motion for Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 10/17/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6

12

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
2:13-cv-00174-JCM-NJK
)
vs.
)
)
TRINITY PHARRIS, et al.,
)
ORDER
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
Before the Court is Plaintiff Ronald Gaines’ Motion for Discovery Pursuant to

13

Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f), LR 26-1, Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(B), and LR 16-1, Docket No. 16. Plaintiff requests

14

that the Court order discovery and a Scheduling Order. Id.

7
8
9
10
11

RONALD GAINES,

15

Plaintiff is correct that Rule 26 entitles parties to discovery; however, pursuant to Rule

16

26(d), neither party is generally required to provide any discovery until after the Rule 26(f)

17

conference occurs.1 To date, no 26(f) conference has occurred nor has Plaintiff shown good cause

18

for why discovery should occur before the conference. Therefore, this request for discovery is

19

denied.

20

Plaintiff’s request is also denied for failure to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2)(B),

21

Fed.R.Civ.P. 34, and LR 26-7. Once discovery begins, the parties must meet and confer in good

22

faith and attempt to resolve their discovery disputes before bringing the matter before the Court.

23

See Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2)(B) and LR 26-7. Plaintiff has not shown that he has made any

24

discovery request from Defendants nor that he has attempted in good faith to meet and confer

25

with Defendants concerning his discovery requests prior to filing this motion with the Court.

26
1

27
28

Under LR 26-1(d), the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) meeting must occur “within thirty (30) days after
the first defendant answers or otherwise appears.” Then, “[f]ourteen (14) days after the mandatory
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) conference, the parties shall submit a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling
order.” Here, the Answer is not due until October 28, 2013, and the Rule 26(f) conference should
be held within 30 days thereafter. The Court anticipates a Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order will
be filed on or before December 12, 2013.

1

Finally, requests for production must comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 34. The Court finds that

2

Plaintiff’s request does not meet these requirements. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion, Docket No.

3

16, shall be denied.

4

CONCLUSION

5

Based on the foregoing, and good cause appearing therefore,

6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Ronald Gaines’ Motion for Discovery Pursuant

7
8

to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f), LR 26-1, Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(B), and LR 16-1, Docket No. 16, is DENIED.
DATED this

17th

day of October, 2013

9
10
11
12

NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-