Williams v. Alfaro, 1:17-cv-01310-AWI-JLT (PC). (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190415d40
Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION AND MOTION TO STAY; ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL; AND ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY (Docs. 48, 50, 51) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court are plaintiff's motion to compel discovery (Doc. 48), defendants' motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as to all claims (Doc. 49), and defendants' motion to stay the Discovery and Scheduling Order pending
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION AND MOTION TO STAY; ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL; AND ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY (Docs. 48, 50, 51) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court are plaintiff's motion to compel discovery (Doc. 48), defendants' motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as to all claims (Doc. 49), and defendants' motion to stay the Discovery and Scheduling Order pending ..
More
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION AND MOTION TO STAY;
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL; AND
ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY
(Docs. 48, 50, 51)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court are plaintiff's motion to compel discovery (Doc. 48), defendants' motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as to all claims (Doc. 49), and defendants' motion to stay the Discovery and Scheduling Order pending resolution of their summary judgment motion (Doc. 50). Defendants have also filed an ex parte application for order shortening time for consideration of their motion to stay. (Doc. 51.)
On review, the Court finds that a stay is warranted because success on the defendants' motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies would resolve this action in their favor in its entirety, and it may unnecessarily waste effort and resources by requiring the parties to proceed with discovery at this stage of the litigation. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
1. Defendants' ex parte application (Doc. 51) is GRANTED;
2. Defendants' motion to stay (Doc. 50) is GRANTED;
3. Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery (Doc. 48) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to its renewal; and
4. Discovery is STAYED. The January 2, 2019, Discovery and Scheduling Order (Doc. 40) is VACATED until further court order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
