Cardoza et al v. Bloomin' Brands, Inc. et al

Filing 95

ORDER Denying as moot 93 Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 4/3/14. (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
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

BROOKE CARDOZA, et al.,

)
)
Plaintiff(s),
)
)
vs.
)
)
BLOOMIN’ BRANDS, INC.,
)
)
)
Defendant(s).
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:13-cv-01820-JAD-NJK
ORDER DENYING MOTION QUASH
(Docket No. 93)

Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to quash, Docket No. 93, arguing that they should

18

not be required to comply with discovery requests propounded prior to the Rule 26(f) conference. It

19

appears to the Court that the same issues are addressed in the parties’ competing discovery plans, see,

20

e.g., Docket No. 90 at 6, 9, for which the Court has already scheduled a hearing for April 7, 2014, see

21

Docket No. 92. Accordingly, the motion to quash is hereby DENIED as moot. To the extent any issues

22

raised in the motion to quash are not resolved at the hearing regarding the discovery plan, Plaintiffs may

23

renew their motion.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

DATED: April 3, 2014

26
27
28

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge