Thompson v. Russell et al

Filing 48

ORDER denying 41 Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Discovery. See Order for further details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Craig S. Denney on 1/28/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 5 DAVID THOMPSON, Plaintiff, 6 7 8 3:23-cv-00341-MMD-CSD v. ORDER Re: ECF No. 41 PERRY RUSSELL, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 On October 4, 2024, Plaintiff David Thompson (Thompson) filed a motion to stay discovery 12 in this action pending the outcome of a motion to certify a class in another case, Lyons v. Russell, Case 13 14 15 16 17 No. 3:23-cv-00335-MMD-CSD. (ECF No. 41.) Defendants filed an opposition to the motion to stay discovery. (ECF No. 42.) Plaintiff filed a reply. (ECF No. 43.) On October 15, 2024, the court issued a report and recommendation in Lyons v. Russell that the motion to certify a class action be denied. (ECF No. 47.) On January 24, 2025, District Judge Du 18 adopted the recommendations in the R&R. (ECF No. 53.) Because the court has ruled that Plaintiff’s 19 motion to certify a class action in Lyons v. Russell be denied, Plaintiff Thompson’s motion to stay 20 discovery in this action pending the outcome of the motion in Lyons is moot. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to stay discovery (ECF No. 41) is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: January 28, 2025. ______________________________________ Craig S. Denney 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?