Filed: Dec. 15, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 15, 2014
Summary: ORDER Docket Nos. 29, 71. NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is a motion to stay discovery filed by Defendants JOGAR LLC, Barry Edmonson, Merit Gaming Group, LLC, Joseph Canfora, Theresa Canfora, and Joseph and Theresa Canfora Trust. Docket No. 29. The moving Defendants seek a stay of discovery pending resolution of their motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition, and the moving Defendants filed a reply. Docket Nos. 44, 47. Also pending before the Cour
Summary: ORDER Docket Nos. 29, 71. NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is a motion to stay discovery filed by Defendants JOGAR LLC, Barry Edmonson, Merit Gaming Group, LLC, Joseph Canfora, Theresa Canfora, and Joseph and Theresa Canfora Trust. Docket No. 29. The moving Defendants seek a stay of discovery pending resolution of their motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition, and the moving Defendants filed a reply. Docket Nos. 44, 47. Also pending before the Court..
More
ORDER Docket Nos. 29, 71.
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is a motion to stay discovery filed by Defendants JOGAR LLC, Barry Edmonson, Merit Gaming Group, LLC, Joseph Canfora, Theresa Canfora, and Joseph and Theresa Canfora Trust. Docket No. 29. The moving Defendants seek a stay of discovery pending resolution of their motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition, and the moving Defendants filed a reply. Docket Nos. 44, 47. Also pending before the Court is a motion to extend discovery deadlines, filed by Plaintiff. Docket No. 71. In that motion, Plaintiff asserts that, inter alia, it is amenable to a 60-day stay of discovery. See id. at 6. In short, the moving Defendants and Plaintiff all agree to at least a 60-day stay of discovery. The Court finds that such a stay furthers the just, speedy and inexpensive resolution of this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. As such, the Court hereby STAYS discovery in this case until February 16, 2015.1 At that time, the parties must submit a joint status report providing their respective positions on whether the stay should be lifted or should continue.
In light of this order, the Court hereby DENIES as moot the motion to stay (Docket No. 29) and the motion for extension (Docket No. 71).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
