Miller v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. et al
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)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
MELVA N. MILLER,
MOTOR COACH INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.,
Case No. 2:17-cv-02103-JCM-CWH
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
scheduling order because the parties did not include a statement of reasons why special scheduling
review was appropriate. (Order (ECF No. 20).) Additionally, the parties’ discovery plan did not
comply with Local Rule 26-1(b)(7)-(9). (Id.) The parties’ amended discovery plan and scheduling
order does not comply with Local Rule 26-1(b)(7)-(9). The court therefore 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 October 4, 2017.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: September 20, 2017
C.W. Hoffman, 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?