Miller v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. et al

Filing 20

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the court denies 17 the proposed discovery plan without prejudice for the parties to meet and confer and file a revised proposed discovery plan and scheduling order by 9/25/17. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 9/11/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
8
MELVA N. MILLER,
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
MOTOR COACH INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:17-cv-02103-JCM-CWH
ORDER

Presently before the court is the parties’ proposed discovery plan and scheduling order (ECF
No. 17), filed on September 1, 2017.
The parties request one year for discovery rather than the standard 180-day discovery plan,

17

but the parties do not explain why longer deadlines should apply in this case. See LR 26-1(a)

18

(stating that “[p]lans requesting special scheduling review must include, in addition to the

19

information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and LR 26-1(b), a statement of the reasons why longer

20

or different time periods should apply to the case”). The court therefore is unable to evaluate

21

whether special scheduling review is appropriate in this case. Additionally, the proposed discovery

22

plan does not comply with Local Rule 26-1(b)(7)-(9). The court therefore denies the proposed

23

discovery plan without prejudice for the parties to meet and confer and file a revised proposed

24

discovery plan and scheduling order by September 25, 2017.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

DATED: September 11, 2017

27
28

______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge