1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 MICHAEL KASPER, Case No. 2:25-cv-02364-GMN-EJY

5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

7 LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, COMMUNITY 8 AMBULANCE LLC, SUNRISE HOSPITAL & MEDICAL CENTER LLC, DOES 1-15; 9 Defendants. 10 11 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Limited Early Discovery to Identify Doe 12 Defendants. ECF No. 2. 13 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) prevents discovery before parties have conferred in 14 accordance with Rule 26(f) absent a stipulation or court order.1 Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d)(1). Moreover, 15 “[a] federal court does not have jurisdiction over a defendant unless the defendant has been served 16 properly under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.” Direct Mail Specialists, Inc. v. Eclat Computerized Techs., Inc., 17

(9th Cir. 1988); see also Murphy Bros. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc.,

344, 351 (1999) (“In the absence of service of process (or waiver of service by the defendant), a 19 court ordinarily may not exercise power over a party the complaint names as defendant.”). 20 While in limited circumstances some courts in the Ninth Circuit have permitted limited early 21 discovery for the purpose of identifying a defendant based on a showing of good cause, e.g. AXS 22 Grp. LLC v. Internet Referral Servs., LLC, Case No. 2:24-377-SPG-EX,

, at 2-3 23 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2024), whether to grant such request remains within the Court’s discretion. Bass 24 v. Arizona Motor Vehicle Division, Case No. CV-24-02380-PHX-JAT (JFM),

, at 25 *5 (D. Ariz. Jan. 29, 2025). Here, no Defendant has been served and, thus, discovery, is premature. 26 Early discovery once service of process on the entity Defendants is accomplished will achieve 27 Plaintiff’s objective within plenty of time to allow efficient pursuit of this case. Finally, the Court 1 finds some of what Plaintiff requests is not the discovery of Doe Defendants’ name, but the 2 production of documents and information related to service of process. ECF No. 2 at 3. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Limited Early 4 Discovery to Identify Doe Defendants (ECF No. 2) is DENIED without prejudice. Once service of 5 process is achieved, Plaintiff may renew a request limited to discovering the names of Doe 6 Defendants. 7 Dated this 4th day of December, 2025.

8 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27