Cobb-Adams v. Homeward Residential Inc., 2:18-cv-01695-JAD-NJK. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20190129b96
Visitors: 14
Filed: Jan. 28, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 28, 2019
Summary: ORDER (Docket No. 22) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is the parties' proposed discovery plan. Docket No. 22. The discovery plan incorrectly calculates the discovery cutoff date from the date of the Rule 26 conference, rather than the date of the first appearance of the first defendant. Id. at 2; Local Rule 26-1(b)(1). The discovery plan fails to proffer any reason for calculating from this date instead of the first defendant's first appearance. Id. Accordi
Summary: ORDER (Docket No. 22) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is the parties' proposed discovery plan. Docket No. 22. The discovery plan incorrectly calculates the discovery cutoff date from the date of the Rule 26 conference, rather than the date of the first appearance of the first defendant. Id. at 2; Local Rule 26-1(b)(1). The discovery plan fails to proffer any reason for calculating from this date instead of the first defendant's first appearance. Id. Accordin..
More
ORDER
(Docket No. 22)
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is the parties' proposed discovery plan. Docket No. 22. The discovery plan incorrectly calculates the discovery cutoff date from the date of the Rule 26 conference, rather than the date of the first appearance of the first defendant. Id. at 2; Local Rule 26-1(b)(1). The discovery plan fails to proffer any reason for calculating from this date instead of the first defendant's first appearance. Id. Accordingly, the discovery plan, Docket No. 22, is DENIED without prejudice. The parties are hereby ORDERED to file, no later than February 4, 2019, an amended proposed discovery plan that complies with the Local Rules and all applicable case law.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
