Fowler v. Daniels ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 SKYLER JAMES FOWLER, Case No. 3:22-cv-00195-MMD-CLB 5 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY 6 v. [ECF No. 127] 7 CHARLES DANIELS, et. al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 Before the Court is Plaintiff Skyler James Fowler’s (“Fowler”) motion to stay case, 11 (ECF No. 127). Fowler requests a stay in this case while the parties negotiate a possible 12 settlement. Fowler also notes that there have been issues with discovery, including 13 allegations of “blatant bad-faith refusal to cooperate in discovery” by Defendants. (Id.) 14 Defendants did not oppose or otherwise respond to the motion. 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 and 21 effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis, 299 U.S. at 254. When exercising 22 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 to 26 grant a stay must be weighed” including the possible damage which may result from the 27 granting of a stay, the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to 28 go forward, and the orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or 1 || 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 for 90 days is appropriate. 5 For good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that Fowler’s motion to stay case, 6 || (ECF No. 127), is GRANTED. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is STAYED for 90 days from the date 8 || of this order, at which point the stay shall be automatically lifted. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 || DATED: April 10, 2024 . 11 12 UNITED whe JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28