Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00703-CMA-MEH
08-09-2011
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty , United States Magistrate Judge, on August 9, 2011.
Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for a Stay of All Proceedings [filed July 7, 2011; docket #43 ] is granted. While the Court typically discourages stays of discovery, the Court acknowledges the efficiency and fairness of delaying the proceedings pending resolution of a motion to dismiss that could resolve this matter in its entirety. See Harris v. United States, No. 09-cv-02658-PAB-KLM, 2010 WL 1687915, at *1 (D. Colo. Apr.27, 2010) ("[n]either [the Court's] nor the parties' time is well-served by being involved in the 'struggle over the substance of the suit' when, as here, a dispositive motion is pending.") (citations omitted). "A stay of discovery pending the determination of a dispositive motion 'is an eminently logical means to prevent wasting the time and effort of all concerned, and to make the most efficient use of judicial resources.'" Chavous v. Dist. of Columbia Fin. Responsibility & Mgmt. Assistance Auth., 201 F.R.D. 1, 2 (D.D.C.2001) (citation omitted). As the pending motion to dismiss concerns the threshold issue of subject matter jurisdiction and may resolve this matter in its entirety, the Court finds good cause exists to impose a temporary stay until the District Court rules on the Motion to Dismiss (docket #38).
Accordingly, all proceedings in this matter are hereby stayed pending the adjudication of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The parties are directed to file a joint status report within five business days of the District Court's order indicating what scheduling changes, if any, are needed.