Jenkins-Naudain v. ABM Industries Inc.

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided March 27, 2023·No. 2:22-cv-01826·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 5 TAKINA JENKINS-NAUDAIN, 6 Case No. 2:22-cv-01826-CDS-NJK Plaintiff(s), 7 Order v. 8 [Docket No. 29] ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATION, et 9 al., 10 Defendant(s). 11 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to stay discovery pending resolution of 12 their motion to compel arbitration. Docket No. 29. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition. Docket 13 No. 31.1 Defendants filed a reply. Docket No. 32. 14 A stay pending resolution of a motion to compel arbitration is warranted when it is 15 potentially dispositive of the action, it can be decided without discovery, and there is a reasonable 16 possibility or probability that the district judge will compel arbitration. Arik v. Meyers, 2020 WL 17 515843, at *1-2 (D. Nev. Jan. 31, 2020) (citing Shaughnessy v. Credit Acceptance Corp. of Nev., 18 2007 WL 9728688, at *2-3 (D. Nev. Nov. 28, 2007). Courts frequently stay discovery pending 19 resolution of a motion to compel arbitration. See, e.g., Mahamedi IP Law, LLP v. Paradice & Li, 20 LLP, 2017 WL 2727874, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2017) (collecting cases). The circumstances 21 here justify such a stay.2 22 1 Plaintiff devotes part of her brief to argue that the Court erred in noting earlier that the 23 parties violated the deadline to file a discovery plan. See Docket No. 31 at 2. Plaintiff is wrong. A discovery plan is due within 44 days of the defendant’s first appearance. Local Rule 26-1(a). 24 Whether CM/ECF automatically generated some other date in an electronic notice is irrelevant; such a notice is not an “order” of the Court and is of no legal consequence. Local Rule IC 3-1(d) 25 (making plain that the local rules trump a courtesy notice issued by CM/ECF as to the computation of deadlines). 26 2 Conducting the preliminary peek can put a magistrate judge in an awkward position and 27 is not intended to prejudice the outcome of the underlying motion. See Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597, 603 (D. Nev. 2011). As such, the Court will not provide a lengthy discussion 28 of the merits of the motion to compel arbitration. 1 Accordingly, the motion to stay discovery is GRANTED. In the event the motion to 2|| compel arbitration is denied, the parties must file a proposed discovery plan or joint status report 3] within 14 days of the issuance of the order resolving that motion. 5 Dated: March 27, 2023

Nancy J. Koppe 7 United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Jenkins-Naudain v. ABM Industries Inc., (D. Nev. 2023).

Jenkins-Naudain v. ABM Industries Inc. (Jenkins-Naudain v. ABM Industries Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc.
278 F.R.D. 597 (D. Nevada, 2011)