Miller v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. et al

Filing 22

ORDER re 21 Proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order. The court denies the amended discovery plan and scheduling order without prejudice for the parties to meet and confer and file a second amended proposed discovery plan and scheduling order by 10/4/17. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 9/21/17. (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’ amended discovery plan and scheduling order (ECF
No. 21), filed on September 18, 2017.
The court required the parties to meet and confer and file an amended discovery plan and

17

scheduling order because the parties did not include a statement of reasons why special scheduling

18

review was appropriate. (Order (ECF No. 20).) Additionally, the parties’ discovery plan did not

19

comply with Local Rule 26-1(b)(7)-(9). (Id.) The parties’ amended discovery plan and scheduling

20

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

21

discovery plan and scheduling order without prejudice for the parties to meet and confer and file a

22

second amended proposed discovery plan and scheduling order by October 4, 2017.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24

DATED: September 20, 2017

25
26
27
28

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