JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY LITIGATION PENDING DISPOSITION OF MOTIONS TO DISMISS

GEORGE FOLEY Jr., Magistrate Judge.

JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY LITIGATION PENDING DISPOSITION OF MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Defendant, Chief Deputy District Attorney James R. Sweetin ("Sweetin"), Defendants North Las Vegas Police Department, City of North Las Vegas, and Chief Joseph Chronister (collectively, "North Las Vegas"), and Plaintiff, Eddie Wormwood ("Plaintiff"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby STIPULATE and AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

This is a civil rights action wherein Plaintiff alleges, inter alia, wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution. Defendants Sweetin and North Las Vegas have moved to dismiss the Complaint [Doc. ## 13, 18]. These motions are fully briefed [Doc. ## 25, 26, 27, 28]. Defendants Dave Molnar and Carrie Meads have not yet appeared.

Pursuant to FRCP 26(f) and LR 26-1(d), the parties should presently conduct a discovery scheduling conference. However, based on the nature of the case, and given the pendency of dispositive motions and the fact that two defendants have not yet appeared, Sweetin, North Las Vegas, and Plaintiff agree that a stay of discovery is warranted until the motions are heard.

This request is not made for the purposes of delay, but to avoid having to engage in costly discovery in a matter that may ultimately be dismissed, even in part, by the Court. The purpose of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is to enable defendants to challenge the legal sufficiency of a complaint without subjecting themselves to discovery, and the motions to dismiss present good faith arguments that could result in relief, at least in part. Ministerio Roca Solida v. U.S. Dep't of Fish and Wildlife, 288 F.R.D. 500 (D. Nev. 2013).

ORDER

Pursuant to the STIPULATION of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all discovery in this matter is STAYED until the disposition of the pending motions to dismiss.