Estrada v. Las Vegas Metro Police Department

Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6 MICHAEL ESTRADA, Case No. 2:22-cv-02089-JAD-NJK Plaintiff(s), Order 9 Vv. [Docket No. 45] LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 10) DEPARTMENT, et al., 11 Defendant(s). 12 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to stay discovery pending resolution of 13] the motion to dismiss. Docket No. 45; see also Docket No. 43 (motion to dismiss). Plaintiff filed 14] response. Docket No. 46.! The Court has considered the governing test, Kor Media Group, LLC 15} v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 581 (D. Nev. 2013), and finds that a stay of discovery is warranted. 16] Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the motion 17] to dismiss. In the event the underlying motion to dismiss is not granted in full, a joint status report 18} or joint discovery plan must be filed within 14 days of the resolution of the motion to dismiss. 20 Dated: January 29, 2024 21 4, x \ a Nancy J. K 22 United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 ' The Court liberally construes the filings of pro se litigants. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 28] 89, 94 (2007). The Court construes Plaintiff’s filing at Docket No. 46 as a response to both the motion to dismiss and the motion to stay discovery.