1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 7 SILVIA REGINA LASKO, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00890-RFB-NJK 8 Plaintiff(s), Order ov. [Docket No. 22] 10) AMIP MANAGEMENT, et al., 11 Defendant(s). 12 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ discovery plan. Docket No. 22. Defendants seek 13] to delay their discovery obligations pending resolution of dispositive motion practice. See id. at 14] 2-3. “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for automatic or blanket stays of 15} discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending.” Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc., 278 16] F.R.D. 597, 601 (D. Nev. 2011). Instead, discovery may be stayed when: (1) there is a pending 17} motion that is potentially dispositive; (2) the potentially dispositive motion can be decided without 18] additional discovery; and (3) the Court has taken a “preliminary peek” at the merits of the 19] underlying motion and is convinced that Plaintiff will be unable to state a claim for relief. Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green,

(D. Nev. 2013). 21 Accordingly, Defendants’ discovery plan is DENIED. Defendants must file a motion to 22|| stay discovery addressing the pertinent standards by August 17, 2023. If Defendants do not do so, 23] the parties must file a joint discovery plan by August 24, 2023. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: August 11, 2023

Nancy J. Koppe 27 United Ste s-Mazistrate Judge 28