Wood v. Fedex Freight, Inc.

Filing 15

ORDER setting Scheduling Conference for 11/26/2013 11:00 AM in LV Courtroom 3D before Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 11/22/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
9
SHEILA WOOD,
10
11
12
13
14

)
)
Plaintiff(s),
)
)
vs.
)
)
FEDEX FREIGHT,
)
)
Defendant(s).
)
__________________________________________)

15

Case No. 2:13-cv-1056-GMN-NJK
ORDER SETTING HEARING

“It is a simple task to comply with the Local Rules governing submission of a proposed

16

discovery plan.” Sierzega v. Country Preferred Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 120095, *1 (D. Nev.

17

Aug. 22, 2013). The parties failed to do so here in several regards. Most significantly, the parties’

18

holding of the Rule 26(f) conference and the filing of the discovery plan were untimely. Defendant

19

filed a motion to dismiss on July 16, 2013. Docket No. 6.1 As such, the discovery plan was due no

20

later than August 30, 2013. See Local Rule 26-1(d) (explaining that the Rule 26(f) conference must

21

take place within 30 days after the first defendant answers or otherwise appears, and the discovery plan

22

must be submitted 14 days thereafter).
In addition, the parties seek a discovery period of roughly 330 days based on an unelaborated

23
24

assertion that some witnesses with relevant information are in different locations. See Docket No. 14 at

25

2. That is not a sufficient explanation for a request to have a discovery period at roughly twice the

26
27
28

1

The filing of a motion to dismiss does not automatically stay the requirement to diligently
conduct discovery. See, e.g., Tradebay v. eBay, 278 F.R.D. 597, 600 (D. Nev. 2011).

1

presumptively reasonable length. See Local Rule 26-1(e)(1) (providing presumptively reasonable

2

discovery period of 180 days from the date the first defendant answers or appears).

3

In short, the presumptively reasonable discovery cutoff in this case is January 13, 2014, and it

4

appears that the parties have not begun discovery or suggested a reasonable period for completing it.

5

Accordingly, the Court hereby SETS a scheduling conference to determine how best to expeditiously

6

conduct discovery in this matter. The scheduling conference will take place on November 26, 2013 at

7

11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3D.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

DATED: November 22, 2013

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