Johnson v. Islamic oils ( 2023 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 LAUSTEVEION JOHNSON, Case No. 3:22-CV-00424-ART-CLB 5 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY 6 v. [ECF No. 12] 7 ISLAMIC OILS, et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 Before the Court is Plaintiff Lausteveion Johnson’s (“Johnson”) motion to stay 11 proceedings. (ECF No. 12). According to Johnson’s motion to stay, he was granted parole 12 and will be released from prison between April 23, 2023 and April 30, 2023, and will not 13 have access to his legal materials for a period of time. (Id.) Thus, Johnson asks the Court 14 to stay his case until May 20, 2023. (Id.) 15 It is well established that district courts have the inherent power to control their 16 dockets and manage their affairs; this includes the power to strike or deny motions to 17 streamline motion practice and promote judicial efficiency. Ready Transp., Inc. v. AAR 18 Mfg., Inc., 627 F.3d 402, 404–05 (9th Cir. 2010); Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 19 (1936). Additionally, “the power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in 20 every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time 21 and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis, 299 U.S. at 254. When 22 exercising that discretion, courts are guided by the goals of securing the just, speedy, and 23 inexpensive resolution of actions. See FED. R. CIV. P. 1. 24 To that end, the Court considers several articulated factors when deciding whether 25 to stay a case: “the competing interests which will be affected by the granting or refusal 26 to grant a stay must be weighed” including the possible damage which may result from 27 the granting of a stay, the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from 2| astay.” CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962). 3 The Court has considered these factors and finds, in the exercise of its sound 4) discretion, that a brief stay of these proceedings until June 15, 2023 is appropriate. 5 The Court additionally notes that pursuant to Nevada Local Rule of Practice IA 3- 6 | 1, a “pro se party must immediately file with the court written notification of any change of 7 | mailing address ... Failure to comply with this rule may result in the dismissal of the 8 | action, entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the court.” 9} Nev. Loc. R. IA 3-1. Thus, Johnson must file his notice of change of address once he has been released from custody. 11 For good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that Johnson’s motion to stay proceedings, (ECF No. 12), is GRANTED. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is STAYED until June 15, 2023, at 14 which point the stay shall be automatically lifted. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Johnson shall file, as soon as practicable, his 16 | updated address with the Court. 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: April 12, 2023 . . 19 UNITED\STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28