K.C. v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, 2:16-cv-03039-JCM-NJK. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20180904b80
Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 31, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 31, 2018
Summary: Order NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a joint motion to extend discovery deadlines, including most urgently the expert disclosure deadline currently set for September 6, 2018. Docket No. 70. 1 The Court hereby SETS a hearing on that motion for 3:00 p.m. on September 4, 2018, in Courtroom 3B. Counsel for all parties shall appear at that hearing, including for the federal Defendants. 2 The Court will hear argument on the motion generally, but the parties
Summary: Order NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a joint motion to extend discovery deadlines, including most urgently the expert disclosure deadline currently set for September 6, 2018. Docket No. 70. 1 The Court hereby SETS a hearing on that motion for 3:00 p.m. on September 4, 2018, in Courtroom 3B. Counsel for all parties shall appear at that hearing, including for the federal Defendants. 2 The Court will hear argument on the motion generally, but the parties s..
More
Order
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is a joint motion to extend discovery deadlines, including most urgently the expert disclosure deadline currently set for September 6, 2018. Docket No. 70.1 The Court hereby SETS a hearing on that motion for 3:00 p.m. on September 4, 2018, in Courtroom 3B. Counsel for all parties shall appear at that hearing, including for the federal Defendants.2 The Court will hear argument on the motion generally, but the parties should be prepared to address in particular the discovery efforts involving the federal Defendants since their appearance nearly three months ago. See Docket No. 65; see also Ministerio Roca Solida v. U.S. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, 288 F.R.D. 500, 502 (D. Nev. 2013) ("The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for automatic or blanket stays of discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending"); Docket No. 54 at 5 (the deadlines in the scheduling order apply to "later-appearing parties, unless the Court, on motion and for good cause shown, orders otherwise").
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The filing is fashioned as a "stipulation," but it was not signed by federal Defendants who have appeared in this case through the filing of a motion to dismiss. Therefore, the Court treats the request as a joint motion. See Local Rule 7-1(c).
2. The Court expresses no opinion herein as to the merits of the joint motion.
Source: Leagle
