Platinum Realty and Holdings, LLC v. Lee et al

Filing 69

ORDER Denying 67 Stipulation Without Prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 3/1/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
PLATINUM REALTY AND HOLDINGS, LLC,
11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
RANDALL M. LEE, et al.,
14
Defendant(s).
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-00535-GMN-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 67)

16

Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend various deadlines. Docket No. 67. It appears

17

that the extension requested was necessitated by the parties’ decision to forego their discovery

18

obligations while they attempted to settle the case. Docket No. 67 at 2. The case law is abundantly

19

clear that the parties’ decision to forego discovery while they attempt to settle a case is not good cause

20

to extend deadlines in the scheduling order. See, e.g., United States v. Jaynes Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist.

21

Lexis 82928, *3 (D. Nev. June 22, 2015) (collecting cases). The parties further request an extension

22

because a motion to dismiss is pending. Docket No. 67 at 2. However, a pending motion dispositive

23

motion is an inadequate basis to stay or extend discovery. Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597,

24

601 (D. Nev. 2011) (“The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for automatic or blanket

25

stays of discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending”).

26

//

27

//

28

//

1

In light of the above, the pending stipulation is hereby DENIED without prejudice.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

DATED: March 1, 2016

4
5

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2