Tabb v. NaphCare et al

Filing 81

ORDER Staying Discovery: The Court orders that all discovery in this matter shall be STAYED pending further orders from this Court. Accordingly, the Court also strikes the current pretrial scheduling order (Dkt. 30 ) and will issue an amended scheduling order at a future date. Signed by Judge Theresa L Fricke. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Danny Tabb, Prisoner ID: 806878)(MW)

Case 3:21-cv-05541-LK-TLF Document 81 Filed 09/15/22 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

4
5
6

DANNY TABB,

7
8
9
10
11

v.

Plaintiff,

Case No. C21-5541 LK-TLF
ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY

NAPHCARE,
Defendants.
Pending are defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim (Dkt. 31,

12

Dkt. 48), the undersigned’s Report and Recommendation on plaintiff’s motion for default

13

judgment (Dkt. 34, Dkt. 62), plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 52) and

14

plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery (Dkt. 56).

15

“[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in

16

every court to control disposition of the cases on its docket with economy of time and

17

effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254

18

(1936). “The exertion of this power calls for the exercise of sound discretion.” CMAX,

19

Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962); see Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706

20

(1997) (“The District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its

21

power to control its own docket.”). A court may relieve a party of the burdens of

22

discovery while a dispositive motion is pending. See Little v. City of Seattle, 863 F.2d

23

681, 685 (9th Cir. 1988).

24
25
ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY - 1

Case 3:21-cv-05541-LK-TLF Document 81 Filed 09/15/22 Page 2 of 2

1

In light of the fact that there is more than one dispositive motion pending before

2

the Court that could resolve all of plaintiff’s claims and in an effort to not burden the

3

parties with the cost of discovery in the meantime, the Court orders that all discovery in

4

this matter shall be STAYED pending further orders from this Court. Accordingly, the

5

Court also strikes the current pretrial scheduling order (Dkt. 30) and will issue an

6

amended scheduling order at a future date.

7
8

Dated this 15th day of September, 2022.

9
10

A

11

Theresa L. Fricke
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY - 2