Moody-Williams v. LipoScience, et al

Filing 28

ORDER denying 19 REQUEST FOR INITIAL CONFERENCE and granting 20 Motion to Continue Rule 26(f) Conference and Entry of Scheduling Order - The court hereby orders that the Rule 26(f) conference, the entry of a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order, the deadline for Rule 26(a) initial disclosures and the conduct of discovery in this matter is continued until after the court rules on Defendants' pending partial motion to dismiss the claims in Plaintiff's complaint. The court will issue its initial order on case planning and scheduling after having ruled on the pending dispositive motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. on 05/18/2012. (Baker, C.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

WESTERN DIVISION

No. 5:12-CV-104-FL

TRACY MOODY-WILLIAMS)
Plaintiff)

v.
LIPOSCIENCE) LOUVENIA
CLEMONS and RONALD BESS,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

This matter comes before the court on the motion of Plaintiff Tracy MoodyWilliams ("Plaintiff') seeking a conference with counsel for Defendants Liposcience,
Louvenia Clemons and Ronald Bess ("Defendants") [DE-19] and upon Defendants'
motion to continue the Rule 26(f) conference until the court has ruled on Defendants'
partially-dispositive motion pending before the court. [DE-20].
The court has not yet entered its initial order regarding case planning and
scheduling requiring the parties to conduct their Rule 26(f) conference, exchange
mandatory initial disclosures and submit their Rule 26(f) report to the court. Defendants
have filed a motion to dismiss whereby, if allowed, Defendants Bess and Clemons will be
dismissed from the case and their participation in the Rule 26(f) conference, initial
disclosures and discovery will not be necessary. Other causes of action may also be
dismissed upon ruling on Defendants' motion which would affect the scope of discovery
in this action and, in turn, the parties' respective approach to a discovery plan governing
this case. Continuing the issuance of the initial order on case planning and scheduling,
the Rule 26(f) conference and the parties' discovery requirements serves the interests of

the parties and the judicial economy of this court. Defendants' motion indicates that
Plaintiff does not oppose Defendants' proposed continuance.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion for a conference with counsel [DE-19] is
DENIED and Defendants' motion to continue [DE-20] is ALLOWED. The court hereby
orders that the Rule 26(f) conference, the entry of a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order, the
deadline for Rule 26(a) initial disclosures and the conduct of discovery in this matter is
continued until after the court rules on Defendants' pending partial motion to dismiss the
claims in Plaintiffs complaint. The court will issue its initial order on case planning and
scheduling after having ruled on the pending dispositive motion.
So ordered, this the 18th day of May, 2012.

Rt:fd:b
United States Magistrate Judge

2