Alexander et al v. Meiling et al

Filing 55

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke, on 1/4/2017. Stipulation to Extend Case Deadlines ECF No. 54 is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA JERRY ALEXANDER, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) DEAN MEILING, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) PRESENT: 3:16-CV-0572-MMD (VPC) MINUTES OF THE COURT THE HONORABLE VALERIE P. COOKE, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEPUTY CLERK: LISA MANN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER(S): NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT(S): NONE APPEARING MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS: The stipulation and order to extend case deadlines pending a ruling on defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF No. 54) is DENIED without prejudice. The explosion of Rule 12(b)(6) motions in the wake of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal 556 U.S. 662, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009), has made speedy determinations of cases increasingly more difficult. Prohibiting or delaying all discovery will often cause unwarranted delay, especially if a pending dispositive motion challenges fewer than all of plaintiff’s claims. A stay of all discovery should only be ordered if the court is “convinced” that a plaintiff will be unable to state a claim for relief. However, as the court in Mlejnecky v. Olympus Imaging America, Inc., 2011 WL 489743 at *6 (E.D.Cal. Feb. 7, 2011) recognized, taking a “preliminary peek” and evaluating a dispositive motion puts a magistrate judge in an awkward position. Rather, this court’s role is to evaluate the propriety of an order staying or limiting discovery with the goal of accomplishing the objectives of Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 1. With Rule 1 as its prime directive, this court must decide whether it is more just to speed the parties along in discovery and other proceedings while a dispositive motion is pending, or whether it is more just to delay or limit discovery and other proceedings to accomplish the inexpensive determination of the case. Tradebay, LLC v. Ebay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597, 603 (D.Nev. 2011). With these principles in mind, the parties shall have leave to refile the stipulation to stay discovery, or alternatively, a motion to stay discovery outlining a more specific and detailed reason for staying discovery in this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK By: /s/ Deputy Clerk

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?