1

2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5

6 RUBEN MAYA, Case No. 2:24-cv-02388-GMN-NJK 7 Plaintiff(s), Order 8 v. [Docket No. 18] 9 CARMAX AUTO SUPERSTORES, INC., 10 Defendant(s). 11 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to stay discovery pending resolution of its 12 motion to compel arbitration. Docket No. 18; see also Docket No. 6 (motion to compel). Plaintiff 13 filed a response in opposition. Docket No. 19.1 The motion is properly resolved without a hearing. 14 See Local Rule 78-1. For the reasons discussed below, the motion to stay discovery is 15 GRANTED. 16 The Court has broad discretionary power to control discovery. See, e.g., Little v. City of 17 Seattle,

(9th Cir. 1988). “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide 18 for automatic or blanket stays of discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending.” 19 Tradebay, LLC v. eBay, Inc.,

(D. Nev. 2011). Discovery may be stayed when: 20 (1) there is a pending motion that is potentially dispositive; (2) the underlying motion can be 21 decided without additional discovery; and (3) the Court has taken a “preliminary peek” at the 22 merits of the underlying motion and finds that motion sufficiently meritorious to warrant a stay. 23 See Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green,

(D. Nev. 2013).2 When the underlying 24 1 Counsel for both parties are reminded that footnotes must be in 12-point font or larger. 25 Local Rule IA 10-1(a)(3). 26 2 Defendant alternatively seeks a stay of discovery under the so-called “good cause” approach used by a minority of magistrate judges in this District. Docket No. 18 at 4, 6 (discussing 27 Schrader v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC,

, at *4 (D. Nev. Oct. 14, 2021)). The undersigned has rejected that minority approach. Flynn v. Nev.,

, 347-51 (D. Nev. 28 2024). 1} motion is one seeking to compel arbitration, a stay is appropriate when the preliminary peek reveals 2|| that there is a reasonable possibility or probability that the district judge will compel arbitration. Arik v. Meyers,

, at *1 (D. Nev. Jan. 31, 2020) (citing Shaughnessy v. Credit 4! Acceptance Corp. of Nev., Inc.,

, at *2-3 (D. Nev. Nov. 28, 2007)). Courts frequently stay discovery pending resolution of a motion to compel arbitration. Mahamedi IP Law, 6] LLP vy. Paradice & Li, LLP,

, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2017) (collecting cases). 7 The Court finds each of the required elements met in this case. The motion to compel 8]| arbitration is potentially dispositive and can be decided without additional discovery.? Moreover, 9] the Court’s preliminary peek reveals that the motion is sufficiently meritorious to justify a stay of discovery.‘ 11 Accordingly, the motion to stay discovery is GRANTED. If the motion to compel is not 12] granted, the parties must file a proposed joint discovery plan within 14 days of the issuance of that 13] order. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: March 25, 2025 Nancy J. Kop pe * 17 United States.Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 > Although Plaintiff now argues that discovery is necessary to decide the pending motion to compel arbitration, see, e.g., Docket No. 19 at 6-7, Plaintiff has already filed a response to the motion to compel that does not argue that discovery must be taken prior to resolution of that motion, Docket No. 14. As such, the Court is not persuaded that discovery is needed prior to 23} resolution of the motion to compel arbitration. See, e.g., Blair v. Barrett Fin. Grp. LLC,

, at *3 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2025) (quoting Ferrell vy. AppFolio, Inc.,

, at *2 241 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2024)). 25 * Conducting the preliminary peek puts the undersigned in an awkward position because the assigned district judge who will decide the motion to compel may have a different view of its 26] merits. See Tradebay,

. The undersigned’s “preliminary peek” at the merits of that motion is not intended to prejudice its outcome. See

As a result, the undersigned will not 27| provide a lengthy discussion of the merits of the pending motion to compel in this instance. Nonetheless, the undersigned has carefully reviewed the arguments presented in the motion to compel and subsequent briefing.