Raymond v. Conine
This text of Raymond v. Conine (Raymond v. Conine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Steven Raymond, et al., 2:23-cv-01195-CDS-MDC Plaintiff(s), Order vs. 6 7 || Zach Conine, et al., 8 Defendant(s). 9 10 Plaintiffs filed this case nearly one year ago. ECF No. 1. The defendants filed a motion to 11 || dismiss on October 10, 2023, which is still pending before the Court. ECF No. 28. Consistent with the 12 || Supreme Court's mandate that trial courts should balance fairness and cost, the Rules do not provide for 13 || automatic or blanket stays of discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending. See Ske/lerup 14 || Indus. Ltd. v. City of Los Angeles, 163 F.R.D. 598, 600-01 (C.D. Cal. 1995). 15 The parties never filed a discovery plan or a stipulation to stay discovery in this case. 16 IT IS ORDERED that by Monday, July 1, 2024 the parties, after meeting-and-conferring, shall 17 || file either: 18 1. A discovery plan and scheduling order; 19 2. A stipulation to stay discovery; or 20 3. A motion to stay discovery. “p, 4 = 21 Dated this 17th day of June 2024. i . a 22 App fx 23 Y if \ rf □ 24 sen Til 25 United States Magistyate Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Raymond v. Conine, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymond-v-conine-nvd-2024.