Heyman v. State of Nevada ex rel Board of Regents for the Nevada System of Higher Education et al
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 169 Defendant Rhonda Montgomery's Emergency Motion to Stay re 165 Motion is granted, in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall have until 9/8/17 to file an opposition to Plaintiffs second motion to compel. Plaintiff shall have until 9/15/17 to file a reply. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 8/31/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
STATE OF NEVADA EX REL. BOARD OF
REGENTS OF THE NEVADA SYSTEM OF
HIGHER EDUCATION ON BEHALF OF
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, LAS VEGAS, et al. )
Case No. 2:15-cv-01228-RFB-GWF
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Rhonda Montgomery’s Emergency Motion to
Stay (ECF No. 169), filed on August 30, 2017.
Plaintiff filed his second motion to compel (ECF No. 165) on August 4, 2017. Defendant’s
counsel represents that he was recently retained to represent Defendant Montgomery. Defendant
requests a stay of the proceedings and a new briefing schedule to allow Defendant an opportunity to
respond to Plaintiff’s second motion to compel. The Court finds good cause to grant Defendant’s
request to stay the disposition of Plaintiff’s second motion to compel as to Defendant Montgomery.
Defendant shall have until September 8, 2017 to file an opposition to Plaintiff’s second motion to
compel. Plaintiff shall have until September 15, 2017 to file a reply. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Rhonda Montgomery’s Emergency Motion to
Stay (ECF No. 169) is granted, in part.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall have until September 8, 2017 to file an
opposition to Plaintiff’s second motion to compel. Plaintiff shall have until September 15, 2017 to
file a reply.
DATED this 31st day of August, 2017.
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?