ORDER

CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is the proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 12). Plaintiff requests that discovery will take 180 days from the date on which the Motion to Dismiss is adjudicated. Id. at 2.

The court will treat the proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 12) as a stipulation to stay discovery.

When evaluating a request to stay discovery while a dispositive motion is pending, the court initially considers the goal of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1. The guiding premise of the Rules is that the Rules "should be construed and administered to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action." FED. R. CIV. P. 1. It needs no citation of authority to recognize that discovery is expensive. The Supreme Court has long mandated that trial courts should resolve civil matters fairly but without undue cost. Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 306 (1962). This directive is echoed by Rule 26, which instructs the court to balance the expense of discovery against its likely benefit. See FED.R.CIV.P. 26(B)(2)(iii).

The court finds good cause to stay discovery. The parties will not need to incur unnecessary discovery costs during the pendency of the motion to dismiss. See FED. R. CIV. P. 1.

Accordingly, and for good cause shown,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties' stipulation to stay discovery (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED. In the event resolution of Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 6) does not result in the disposition of this case, the parties must file a new joint discovery plan within 21 days of the issuance of the order deciding that motion.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that discovery is STAYED pending further order of the court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a status hearing is scheduled for 10:00 AM, July 6, 2020, in Courtroom 3D.