Bullion Monarch Mining, Inc. v. Barrick Goldstrike Mines, Inc. (Sub File of 3:08-cv-227-ECR-VPC)

Filing 267

ORDER granting 263 Plaintiff's Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery, denying without prejudice 260 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, and granting in part and denying in part 264 Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings and Set Discovery and Briefing Schedule. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 10/27/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
BULLION MONARCH MINING, INC.,
9
10
11
12
13

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
BARRICK GOLDSTRICK MINES, INC., )
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________________)

3:09-cv-00612-MMD-WGC
ORDER
Re: ECF Nos. 260, 263, 264

14
On September 8, 2017, Barrick Goldstrike Mines Inc. (Goldstrike) filed a Motion to Dismiss for
15
Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, arguing that it and Bullion Monarch Mining, Inc. (Bullion) were
16
citizens of the same state (Utah) when this case was initiated against Goldstrike in 2009. (ECF No. 260.)
17
On September 22, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order to extend the deadline to
18
respond to the motion to dismiss so that Bullion could make a motion for discovery on the jurisdictional
19
issues raised in the motion. (ECF No. 261.) District Judge Du approved the stipulation and entered an
20
order extending the deadline to respond to the motion until September 29, 2017. (ECF No. 262.)
21
On September 29, 2017, Bullion filed its Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery. (ECF No. 263.)
22
That same day, the parties filed a joint motion: (1) to stay proceeding pending resolution of Goldstrike’s
23
motion to dismiss; (2) to suspend briefing on the motion to dismiss pending resolution of Bullion’s
24
motion for jurisdictional discovery and the completion of such discovery; (3) to set the discovery period
25
to run ninety days from an order on Bullion’s motion for jurisdictional discovery, with a status check
26
set for 60 days from that order; and (4) for an order setting the briefing schedule on the motion to dismiss
27
giving Bullion 30 days after the close of (jurisdictional) discovery to file its response and giving
28
Goldstrike 21 days thereafter to submit its reply. (ECF No. 264.) Goldstrike has since filed its response

1

to the motion for jurisdictional discovery (ECF No. 265), and Bullion filed its reply (ECF No. 266).

2

The parties agree that jurisdictional discovery may be taken and that it should take place for

3

ninety days from the date of the court’s order on this motion, with a status check in sixty days, but

4

disagree as to the scope of such discovery. Goldstrike wants to limit discovery initially to one

5

Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, ten interrogatories and ten requests for production, and then determine whether

6

additional discovery is warranted. Bullion, on the other hand, wants to depose Mr. Haddock as well as

7

those listed in his affidavit, and propound written discovery (interrogatories, document requests and

8

requests for admission) to determine where Goldstrike’s “nerve center” under Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559

9

U.S. 77 (2010).

10

The court agrees that good cause exists to re-open discovery, limited to jurisdictional discovery,

11

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), in order to determine whether the court has subject

12

matter jurisdiction over Goldstrike under the “nerve center” test enunciated by the Supreme Court in

13

Hertz. The court likewise agrees with the parties’ determination regarding a time-period of ninety days

14

for jurisdictional discovery. The court has broad discretion to permit or deny jurisdictional discovery.

15

Laub v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 342 F.3d 1080, 1083 (9th Cir. 2003). Given that this case was filed

16

in 2009, and that the parties have agreed to a jurisdictional discovery period of ninety days, the court will

17

set parameters on the jurisdictional discovery to be taken by Bullion. Bullion will be allowed to take one

18

Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, as well as the depositions of two officers. It will be permitted to propound

19

written discovery including ten interrogatories, ten requests for production, and ten requests for

20

admission, which may include reasonable and discreet subparts. The court will deny the motion to

21

dismiss without prejudice, and will endeavor to set a status conference approximately forty-five days

22

from the date of this Order. At that time, the court expects Bullion to be able to discuss whether it

23

anticipates the discovery permitted is sufficient to proceed with re-filing its motion to dismiss upon

24

completion of the ninety-day period. Briefing on the newly filed motion to dismiss is discussed in further

25

detail below.

26

///

27

///

28

///
2

1

CONCLUSION

2

(1) Bullion’s Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery (ECF No. 263) is GRANTED insofar as

3

discovery is re-opened for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of this Order for the purpose of

4

conducting jurisdictional discovery, which is initially limited to the following: (a) one Rule 30(b)(6)

5

deposition; (b) the depositions of two other officers; (c) ten interrogatories; (d) ten requests for

6

production of documents; and (e) ten requests for admission; the written discovery may include

7

reasonable and discreet subparts;

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

(2) The court will endeavor to schedule a status conference forty-five days from the date of this
Order;
(3) The Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 260) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and may be
re-filed by Bullion upon the completion of jurisdictional discovery;
(4) The parties’ joint motion (ECF No. 264) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART
as follows:
(a) as indicated above, the jurisdictional discovery period will run for ninety-days, commencing
on the date of this Order, with a status check in approximately forty-five days;

16

(b) the motion to dismiss has been denied without prejudice, to be re-filed by Bullion upon the

17

completion of discovery (i.e., on the ninety-first day following this Order unless the court has extended

18

jurisdictional discovery);

19

(c) once the motion to dismiss is re-filed, briefing will proceed according to Local Rule 7-2(b),

20

i.e., the response is due fourteen days after the motion is filed, with a reply due seven days after service

21

of the response;

22
23

(d) any remaining scheduling order deadlines that remain pending are vacated and will be re-set
following a determination on the re-filed motion to dismiss.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

DATED: October 27, 2017.

26
____________________________________
WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
3