From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jenkins-Naudain v. Abm Indus.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Feb 2, 2023
2:22-cv-01826-CDS-NJK (D. Nev. Feb. 2, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-01826-CDS-NJK

02-02-2023

TAKINA JENKINS-NAUDAIN, Plaintiffs, v. ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, et al., Defendants


ORDER

[DOCKET NO. 17]

NANCY J. KOPPE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pending before the Court is Defendants' motion to stay discovery pending resolution of their motion to compel arbitration. Docket No. 17 at 13-16. The motion to stay discovery was advanced within motion practice seeking to compel arbitration and to dismiss or stay these proceedings pending completion of arbitration. See id. Plaintiff responded to the motion practice in general, but does not appear to address whether discovery should be stayed pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration. See Docket No. 20. Defendants' reply similarly appears to skip over argument pertinent to whether discovery should be stayed pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration. See Docket No. 24.

To ensure a clear record and a proper presentation of argument on this issue, the Court DENIES without prejudice the motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration. Any renewed motion to stay discovery must be complete in of itself and the subsequent briefing must specifically address whether discovery should be stayed pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration.

The Court herein will not opine on the other aspects of the motion practice pending before the district judge. With respect to the motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration specifically, however, the Court notes that this request is a motion for protective order brought pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See, e.g., Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. Tracinda Corp., 175 F.R.D. 554, 555-56 (D. Nev. 1997) (quoting Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, 124 F.R.D. 652, 653 (D. Nev. 1989)). A meet-and-confer is required for a motion for protective order. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c)(1). Any renewed motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration must include a proper certification of a prefiling conference. Local Rule 26-6(c).

I IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jenkins-Naudain v. Abm Indus.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Feb 2, 2023
2:22-cv-01826-CDS-NJK (D. Nev. Feb. 2, 2023)
Case details for

Jenkins-Naudain v. Abm Indus.

Case Details

Full title:TAKINA JENKINS-NAUDAIN, Plaintiffs, v. ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, et…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Feb 2, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-01826-CDS-NJK (D. Nev. Feb. 2, 2023)