Kush, Inc. v. Van Vranken

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10

11 KUSH, INC., Case No.: 2:20-cv-00647-APG-NJK 12 Plaintiff(s), Order 13 v. [Docket No. 26] 14 FRANK VAN VRANKEN, 15 Defendant(s). 16 Pending before the Court is a stipulation to stay discovery pending resolution of a 17 forthcoming motion for partial dismissal. Docket No. 26. 18 “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for automatic or blanket stays of 19 discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending.” Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 20 F.R.D. 597, 601 (D. Nev. 2011). Discovery may be stayed when: (1) there is a pending motion 21 that is potentially dispositive in nature and scope; (2) the potentially dispositive motion can be 22 decided without additional discovery; and (3) the Court has taken a “preliminary peek” at the 23 merits of the potentially dispositive motion and is convinced that the plaintiff will be unable to 24 state a claim for relief. Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 581 (D. Nev. 2013). 25 The Court is guided in its analysis by the objectives in Rule 1 to secure a just, speedy, and 26 inexpensive determination of cases. See Tradebay, 278 F.R.D. at 602-03. 27 In this case, the anticipated motion to dismiss is only partial in nature. That the motion is 28 not potentially case-dispositive, standing alone, warrants denial of the request to stay all discovery. 1] E.g., Martinez v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dept., 2020 WL 3166611, at *1 (D. Nev. June 9, 2020). 2 In addition, the motion to dismiss has not been filed and briefed, so the undersigned is unable to 3}, conduct a preliminary peek. 4 Accordingly, the stipulation to stay discovery is DENIED. The parties must file a 5|| discovery plan by June 24, 2020. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: June 17, 2020 ao

Nancy J..Koppe, _ 9 United StatesMagistrate Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28