BROOKS v. SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S., LLC, 2:14-cv-976. (2015)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20150616b01
Visitors: 19
Filed: Jun. 15, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 15, 2015
Summary: ORDER GREGORY L. FROST , District Judge . This matter is before the Court for consideration of Defendants' motion to stay discovery (ECF No. 36), Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 39), Defendants' reply memorandum (ECF No. 40), and Plaintiff's amended memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 42). Defendants ask the Court to stay all discovery until the Court issues a decision on Defendants' pending motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff opposes such a stay, arguing that discovery is n
Summary: ORDER GREGORY L. FROST , District Judge . This matter is before the Court for consideration of Defendants' motion to stay discovery (ECF No. 36), Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 39), Defendants' reply memorandum (ECF No. 40), and Plaintiff's amended memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 42). Defendants ask the Court to stay all discovery until the Court issues a decision on Defendants' pending motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff opposes such a stay, arguing that discovery is ne..
More
ORDER
GREGORY L. FROST, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court for consideration of Defendants' motion to stay discovery (ECF No. 36), Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 39), Defendants' reply memorandum (ECF No. 40), and Plaintiff's amended memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 42). Defendants ask the Court to stay all discovery until the Court issues a decision on Defendants' pending motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff opposes such a stay, arguing that discovery is needed to respond to the motion for summary judgment. Defendants counter that "Plaintiff has certainly had every opportunity to conduct sufficient discovery to respond to Defendants' dispositive motion." (ECF No. 40, at Page ID #563.) The briefing paints two notably different pictures of how discovery has proceeded to date. Regardless of which depiction is correct, the Court finds insufficient cause for staying discovery during the pendency of the summary judgment motion. This Court therefore DENIES the motion to stay discovery. (ECF No. 36.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
