Verloncia Chabeaun Carr v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Case No. 2:25-cv-01701-GMN-NJK Plaintiff, Order v. [Docket No. 29] DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. Pending before the Court is Defendant Circus Circus LV, LLC’s motion to stay discovery pending resolution of Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Docket No. 29.1 Plaintiff filed a response. Docket No. 32. The Court does not require a reply or a hearing. LR 78-1. Plaintiff submits that the instant motion is procedurally unnecessary because the parties have already stipulated to stay discovery as to Defendant Circus Circus LV, LLC. See Docket No. 32 at 2. Plaintiff is incorrect. Having considered the governing standards, Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 581 (D. Nev. 2013), the Court finds that a stay of discovery as to Defendant Circus Circus is warranted.2 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to stay discovery. Docket No. 29. If resolution of the motion to dismiss does not result in termination of this case against Defendant 1 The motion to dismiss is fully briefed. Docket Nos. 22, 24, 26. 2 Conducting the preliminary peek puts the undersigned in an awkward position because the assigned district judge will decide the underlying motion and may have a different view of the merits. See Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 F.R.D. 597, 603 (D. Nev. 2011). The undersigned’s “preliminary peek” at the merits of the motion for judgment on the pleadings is not intended to prejudice its outcome. See id. The undersigned carefully reviewed the arguments presented in the underlying motion and related briefing, but will not provide discussion of the merits herein. 1}, Circus Circus, Plaintiff and Defendant Circus Circus must comply with the scheduling order issued today by the Court. Dated: November 25, 2025 Ae ,

Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge