UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

JAMES BUECHLER and JESSE MARTINEZ, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs, v. Case No.: 8:22-cv-2237-SDM-AAS

RUMBLE INC.,

Defendant. _______________________________________/

ORDER Defendant Rumble Inc. (Rumble) moves for entry of an order staying discovery pending resolution of its motion to dismiss Plaintiffs James Buechler’s and Jesse Martinez’s (collectively, the plaintiffs) complaint. (Doc. 30). The plaintiffs oppose the motion. (Doc. 31). District courts have inherent power to control their dockets and manage their cases. Equity Lifestyle Prop., Inc. v. Fla. Mowing and Landscaping Serv., Inc.,

(11th Cir. 2009). This inherent power includes the discretion to stay the proceedings. Andersons, Inc. v. Enviro Granulation, LLC, No. 8:13-cv-3004-T-33MAP,

at * 2 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 14, 2014). “Motions to stay discovery pending ruling on a dispositive motion are generally 1 disfavored in this district.” Ray v. Spirit Airlines, Inc., No. 12-61528-CIV,

, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 9, 2012).1

In deciding a defendant’s request for a stay of discovery pending a ruling on a dispositive motion, “it is necessary for the court to ‘take a preliminary peek’ at the merits of the [dispositive motion] to see if it appears to be clearly meritorious and truly case dispositive.” Feldman v. Flood,

(M.D. Fla. 1997). When evaluating whether a motion to dismiss is “clearly meritorious,” courts consider whether “any binding Eleventh Circuit authority” clearly requires dismissal of the claims. See Meyer v. Diversified Consultants, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-393-J-34JBT,

, at *2

(M.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2014). In addition, “discovery stay motions are generally denied except where a specific showing of prejudice or burdensomeness is made or where a statute dictates that a stay is appropriate or mandatory.” Montoya v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 14-20474-CIV,

, at *2 (S.D. Fla. June

20, 2014). “Ultimately, the proponent of the stay bears the burden of demonstrating its necessity, appropriateness, and reasonableness.” Ray,

, at *1.

1 “Normally, the pendency of a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment will not justify a unilateral motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the dispositive motion. Such motions for stay are rarely granted. However, unusual circumstances may justify a stay of discovery in a particular case upon a specific showing of prejudice or undue burden.” Middle District Discovery (2021) § I.E.4. A preliminary review of Rumble’s motion to dismiss reveals it does not meet the extraordinarily stringent “clearly meritorious” standard. Rumble also failed to demonstrate prejudice or undue burden if discovery proceeds. Thus, the balance tips in favor of requiring discovery to go forward. Accordingly, Rumble’s Motion to Stay Discovery (Doc. 31) is DENIED. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on December 12, 2022.

Aranda. Agneh Sarioug AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE United States Magistrate Judge