Carter v. Fort Bend Independent School District et al

Filing 112

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 89 Defendant Richard L. Muller's Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending this Court's Rulings on Defendants' Dispositive Motions is GRANTED. See Order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 10/30/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6 GWEDOLYN CARTER, 7 8 9 10 11 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) FORT BEND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL ) DISTRICT, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________) Case No. 2:17-cv-01930-RFB-CWH ORDER 12 13 Presently before the court is Defendant Richard L. Muller’s Motion to Stay Proceedings 14 Pending this Court’s Rulings on Defendants’ Dispositive Motions (ECF No. 89), filed on October 15 6, 2017. Defendants Yolanda Humphrey and Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott, LLP filed 16 a joinder (ECF No. 91) to the motion on October 9, 2017. Defendant Ford Bend County Municipal 17 Utility District #2 filed a joinder (ECF No. 93) to the motion on October 10, 2017. Plaintiff 18 Gwendolyn Carter and the other defendants did not respond to the motion. 19 Defendant Muller requests that the court stay this case, including the deadline to respond to 20 Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 61), pending the court’s rulings on Defendants’ 21 various motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 15, 29, 38, 51, 54, 71) for lack of personal jurisdiction, lack 22 of subject matter jurisdiction, insufficient service of process, and other defenses. Defendant Muller 23 argues that the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this case would not be promoted by 24 requiring any further action on the part of the defendants at this time. Given that the motion is 25 unopposed, the court will grant it. See Local Rule 7-2(d) (stating that “[t]he failure of an opposing 26 party to file points and authorities in response to any motion, except a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 27 56 or a motion for attorney’s fees, constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion.”) 28 /// 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Richard L. Muller’s Motion to Stay 2 Proceedings Pending this Court’s Rulings on Defendants’ Dispositive Motions (ECF No. 89) is 3 GRANTED. All deadlines in this case are stayed pending the United States district judge’s rulings 4 on the pending motions to dismiss. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the court denies any of the pending motions to dismiss, 6 the remaining parties must meet and confer and file a proposed discovery plan and scheduling order 7 with 21 days of the court’s ruling on the relevant motion to dismiss. 8 9 DATED: October 30, 2017 10 11 12 ______________________________________ C.W. Hoffman, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?