Nevada Power Company v. Trench France SAS et al

Filing 21

ORDER denying without prejudice 20 Motion for leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery. The Court expects the parties to comply with the current deadlines for the Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference and the submission of the stipulated discovery plan and proposed scheduling order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 5/19/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DKJ)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9
10
11
12
13
14

NEVADA POWER COMPANY,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
TRENCH FRANCE SAS., et al,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:15-cv-00264-JCM-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 20)

15
16

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery. Docket

17

No. 20. Plaintiff represents that Defendant Trench refuses to engage in a Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference

18

or any sort of discovery plan and, therefore, the parties will not be able to submit a joint discovery plan as

19

required by the Federal and Local Rules. Id., at 3, n. 1; Docket No. 20-1, at 3-4.

20

On April 29, 2015, Defendant Trench filed its motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. Docket No.

21

15. The Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference is required to be held within 30 days after the first defendant’s

22

answer or appearance. See Local Rule 26-1(d) (“Counsel for plaintiff shall initiate the scheduling of the

23

Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) meeting within thirty (30) days after the first defendant answers or otherwise appears”).

24

Therefore, the parties are required to hold their Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference no later than May 29, 2015.

25

The stipulated discovery plan is due 14 days after the Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference. See Local Rule

26

26-1(d) (“Fourteen (14) days after the mandatory Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference, the parties shall submit

27

a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order”). Accordingly, and as specifically stated on the docket,

28

1

the stipulated discovery plan is due no later than June 13, 2015.1 Docket No. 15.

2

Since the dates for the mandatory Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference and the submission of the joint

3

discovery plan and proposed scheduling order have not yet passed, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to conduct

4

jurisdictional discovery (Docket No. 20) is premature. The Court therefore DENIES Plaintiff’s motion

5

without prejudice. The Court expects the parties to comply with the current deadlines for the Fed.R.Civ.P.

6

26(f) conference and the submission of the stipulated discovery plan and proposed scheduling order.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

DATED: May 19, 2015.

9
10
______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

1

27

The Court is cognizant that Defendant Trench’s motion to dismiss remains pending. See Docket No.
15. “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for automatic or blanket stays of discovery when
a potentially dispositive motion is made.” Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 581 (D. Nev.
2013) (quoting Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597, 602-03 (D. Nev. 2011)). If a stay is sought
by any or all parties, an appropriate request must be filed addressing the relevant standards. A party may
not seek to impose its own stay of discovery by refusing to engage in the required Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f)
conference.

28

2

24
25
26