1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 BLANCA MIRANDA CRUZ, Case No.: 2:20-cv-01509-GMN-NJK 9 Plaintiff(s), Order v. [Docket No. 15] 11 ISDEL SURI RUIZ, et al., 12 Defendant(s). 13 Pending before the Court is Defendant Allstate’s motion to compel discovery. Docket No. 14] 15. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition. Docket No. 16. The Court does not require a reply. 15 Except in circumstances not present here, “[t]he failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion . . . constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion.” 17] Local Rule 7-2(d).' Plaintiff’s responsive brief does not contain any legal authorities of any kind. 18]| As such, the motion to compel is deemed unopposed. 19 Accordingly, Defendant Allstate’s motion to compel is GRANTED. Amended 20|| interrogatories providing the disputed information must be served by November 17, 2020. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: November 10, 2020

Nancy J. Koppe. 24 United States-Magistrate Judge 25 26 27 ' The Court notes further that the party seeking to avoid discovery bears the burden of showing why the discovery should not be permitted. V5 Techs. v. Switch, Ltd.,

, 28] 309 (D. Nev. 2019) (citing Blankenship v. Hearst Corp.,

(9th Cir. 1975)).