From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Clark Cnty.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 27, 2022
2:22-cv-00899-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Dec. 27, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-00899-GMN-NJK

12-27-2022

DAICHENA THOMAS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CLARK COUNTY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

[DOCKET NO. 18]

Nancy J. Kpppe United States Magistrate Judge

Pending before the Court is Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department's motion to compel. Docket No. 18.

This dispute does not appear to be one that should require judicial intervention. The instant motion represents that Plaintiffs' counsel has been non-responsive to requests to meet and confer. See, e.g., Docket No. 18 at 5. The Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiffs' counsel to call or email defense counsel by January 3, 2023, with availability to conduct a meet and confer. The meet and confer must take place by January 10, 2023.

In light of the above, the motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Clark Cnty.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 27, 2022
2:22-cv-00899-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Dec. 27, 2022)
Case details for

Thomas v. Clark Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:DAICHENA THOMAS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CLARK COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Dec 27, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-00899-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Dec. 27, 2022)