1

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Justin Ornelas, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-00304-JCM-DJA 6 Plaintiffs, 7 Order v. 8 Amazon.com, Inc.; et al., 9 Defendants. 10 And related third-party claims. 11 12 Before the Court is a stipulation to stay discovery. (ECF No. 30). The underlying action 13 arises out of a four-car accident involving three passenger vehicles and a semi bearing an 14 Amazon-branded trailer. Plaintiffs—Justin Ornelas, Jasmine Ornelas, and minor J.O.—sue 15 Amazon.com, Inc. and the driver of the semi, Vokhidzmon Abdukarimov. Amazon filed a third- 16 party complaint against INKAS, LLC, alleging that INKAS agreed to indemnify Amazon, but 17 failed to respond to Amazon’s formally tendered defenses. (ECF Nos. 26, 27). The parties 18 represent that INKAS has been served but has not yet appeared in this action. (ECF No. 30 at 2 19 n.1). 20 The parties anticipate that six other claimants from the other two passenger vehicles in the 21 accident may file civil actions. (Id. at 2). They explain that the statute of limitations for the non- 22 party claimants ends on April 30, 2023. (Id.). Because they anticipate that other parties may 23 initiate an action regarding the same circumstances underlying the instant litigation, the parties 24 ask to stay discovery for six months to allow sufficient time: “(1) for the non-parties to file suit up 25 to the expiration of the statute of limitations[;] (2) for Defendants to remove and move to 26 consolidate the additional actions with this action[;] (3) for all parties, including the new parties, 27 to conduct mandatory initial discovery conferences and serve initial disclosures[;] (4) and then 1 have reasonable time to conduct discovery.” (Id. at 3). The parties also provide proposed 2 amended discovery deadlines. (Id. at 4). 3 The Court grants in part and denies in part the parties’ stipulation. The Court grants the 4 parties’ request that it stay discovery. But it denies the request that it stay discovery for six 5 months. It also denies the parties’ proposed extended discovery plan. 6 The Court finds a stay of discovery appropriate under the good cause analysis in Scharder 7 v. Wynn, No. 2:19-cv-02159-JCM-BNW,

, at *4 (D. Nev. Oct. 14, 2021) and 8 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1. Consolidating related actions before proceeding with 9 discovery will conserve party and Court resources. But, until any non-parties file complaints, the 10 parties’ concerns about other, similar actions are speculative. So is the need for additional time to 11 remove and consolidate actions. The Court will thus only grant the stay until April 30, 2023, 12 when the parties assert that the statute of limitations for non-party claimants will have run.1 The 13 Court will require the parties to file a motion or stipulation to extend the stay or a proposed 14 discovery plan on April 30, 2023. 15 16 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the parties’ stipulation (ECF No. 30) is granted in 17 part and denied in part as outlined here. 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that discovery is stayed until April 30, 2023. The parties 19 shall file either: (1) a motion or stipulation to extend the stay; or (2) a proposed discovery plan on 20 April 30, 2023. 21 22 DATED: March 6, 2023 23 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 24 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26

27 1 The Court makes no findings about whether the statute of limitations on any claim will have run