Lane Coder Photography, LLC v. The Hearst Corporation et al

Filing 97

ORDER: The parties' joint request to stay deposition discovery pending the Court's ruling on the Hearst Defendants' motion to dismiss is DENIED. The Court previously stayed discovery for settlement purposes and again pending a decis ion on Plaintiff's motion to amend. See ECF No. 66 (staying discovery for 20 days for a settlement conference); No. 69 (staying discovery for four months pending decision on motion to amend). Upon a decision on the motion to amend, the Court entered an Amended Case Management Plan, which contemplated both the filing of the now-pending motion to dismiss, and that fact discovery would be completed by March 25, 2025. See ECF No. 86. Thus, the parties have already been granted two stays, t wo settlement conferences with the Court, and an extensive discovery schedule. See ECF No. 41. Accordingly, the parties have not demonstrated either changed circumstances or good cause to justify a third stay. Absent further order of the Court, all discovery shall be completed by March 25, 2025. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 3/10/2025) (dsh)