Opinion
Case No. 8:11-cv-949-T-33EAJ.
September 29, 2011
ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendants' Motion to Stay Proceedings. (Doc. # 48). Plaintiff Gibson filed a Response in opposition thereto. (Doc. # 49). For the reasons that follow, the motion will be denied.
In the motion, Defendants seek a stay of the case until the Court enters its ruling on the pending Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 3) and Motion to Transfer (Doc. # 17). Defendants wish to avoid incurring attorneys' fees, costs and expenses in responding to discovery should their motions be granted. (Doc. # 48 at 2).
The Court "must take an active role in managing cases on [its] docket." Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353, 1366 (11th Cir. 1997). If this Court were to grant the motion, the dates established in the Case Management and Scheduling Order would be meaningless. Thus, the case would not be on track for a speedy determination, as required by Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
As stated in Chudasama, 123 F.3d at 1366, this Court enjoys broad discretion "in deciding how best to manage the cases before [it]" and, under the circumstances of this case, the Court determines that it is appropriate to deny the motion.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED:
Defendants' Motion to Stay Proceedings (Doc. # 48) is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida,