Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de75> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de75 RegisterActionDate "2010-06-08" @default.
- ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de75 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before Honorable Jeffrey Cole: Motion hearing held. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Bowen Defendants to Comply with Discovery 69 is granted, since the plaintiff has, as of the date of the motion to compel, chosen not to have filed a motion to stay discovery during the pendency of the motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds. Neither part has cited a case which squarely holds either that a district court can require that merits discovery proceed during the pendency of a Rule 12(b)(2) motion or that holds that until the resolution of such a motion a district court must not allow discovery to proceed against the moving party on any issue other than jurisdiction. What is clear, however, is that in every reported case of which I am aware, a party seeking dismissal under Rule 12(b)(2) filed a timely motion to stay discovery. That has not occurred here even though the motion to dismiss was filed more than 7 months ago. Nothing in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for an automatic stay of merits-based discovery in favor of the party objecting to personal jurisdiction merely because a motion questioning jurisdiction has been filed. Indeed, the fact that courts have found it necessary even to rule on motions for such stays is a persuasive datum that there is not an automatic stay of discovery in favor of a party objecting to personal jurisdiction. Finally, compliance with this order granting the motion to compel is not a waiver of any jurisdictional arguments that are presently before Judge Lefkow. Compliance with this motion shall occur by July 8, 2010. The case is continued for further status on 8/9/10 at 8:30 a.m. The parties are assured that they shall have ample time to complete discovery in the event the motion to dismiss is decided adversely to the moving defendants. Mailed notice (cdh, ) (Entered: 06/10/2010)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de75 AdministrativeID "74" @default.
- ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de75 OntologyLabel minute_entry @default.
- ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de75 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:09-cv-06010_de71 @default.