Hargrove v. Washington State Department of Corrections

Full title: THOMAS RANDAL HARGROVE and MICHAEL STEVEN NOVAK, Plaintiffs, v. WASHINGTON…

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma

Date published: May 2, 2011

No. C10-0363 RBL/KLS (W.D. Wash. May. 2, 2011)

Opinion

No. C10-0363 RBL/KLS.

May 2, 2011

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY

KAREN STROMBOM, Magistrate Judge

Pending before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and To Stay Discovery Pending Outcome. ECF No. 18. In this Order, the Court addresses Defendants' motion to stay discovery. The motion for summary judgment is the subject of a separate Report and Recommendation.

BACKGROUND

In their motion for summary judgment, Defendants argue that Plaintiffs' claims should be dismissed because Plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies, Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for relief against the Washington State Department of Corrections, Plaintiffs have failed to show a constitutional violation, and Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. ECF No. 18, p. 2. Under separate Report and Recommendation, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiffs' claims should be dismissed without prejudice because they have failed to exhaust their available administrative remedies.

DISCUSSION

The court has broad discretionary powers to control discovery. Little v. City of Seattle, 863 F.2d 681, 685 (9^th Cir. 1988). Upon showing of good cause, the court may deny or limit discovery. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). A court may relieve a party of the burdens of discovery while a dispositive motion is pending. DiMartini v. Ferrin, 889 F.2d 922 (9^th Cir. 1989), amended at 906 F.2d 465 (9^th Cir. 1990) Rae v. Union Bank, 725 F.2d 478 (9^th Cir. 1984).

As noted above, the undersigned is recommending to the District Court that Plaintiffs' claims be dismissed without prejudice because they failed to avail themselves of their administrative remedies. Defendants should not face the burden and expense of responding to discovery as to claims that will be dismissed if the District Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

(1) Defendant's motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the motion for summary judgment (ECF NO. 18) is GRANTED.

(2) All discovery is STAYED pending further order of this Court.

(3) The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and counsel for Defendants.