Kiyoi v. Semiconductors
- Nathanael Cousins
- 5:26-cv-03655
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Makiyah Kiyoi v. NXP Semiconductors, Judge Freeman stayed discovery against Garda World while its dismissal motion was pending.
Makiyah Lumont Kiyoi, Garda World Security Services of California, Inc., and NXP USA, Inc.; discovery is stayed as to Garda World and NXP, while other parties remain unserved.
What happened
In Makiyah Lumont Kiyoi v. NXP Semiconductors, et al., Garda World asked the court to pause initial disclosures and discovery while it awaited a decision on its motion to dismiss the only claim against it. The claim alleges that defendants improperly disclosed Kiyoi’s information to police, leading to a warrantless search of his residence.
Kiyoi opposed the request, arguing that Garda World possessed documents and recordings needed to challenge the dismissal motion and that a stay would cause delay and risk loss of evidence. The court found that the motion to dismiss could eliminate Garda World from the case and could be decided from the existing pleadings, without additional discovery.
The court granted Garda World’s motion to stay discovery and found that the stay would not unfairly prejudice Kiyoi. Discovery was stayed as to Garda World and NXP, and the case-management conference was continued to February 18, 2027. The order was signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman.
The detailed version
- Kiyoi v. Semiconductors · No. 5:26-cv-03655
- Nathanael Cousins
- Sept. 22, 2026
Background
Makiyah Lumont Kiyoi’s amended complaint narrowed the claims against NXP USA, Inc. and Garda World Security Services of California, Inc. to one claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. NXP had already obtained a stay of initial disclosures and discovery while its motion to dismiss was pending. Garda World later filed its own motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which asks whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim, and sought the same discovery stay. Kiyoi opposed the motion.
Arguments
Garda World argued that its dismissal motion could dispose of the only claim against it and raised issues that could be resolved from the pleadings without discovery. Kiyoi argued that Garda World possessed call-recording metadata, a 911-line document, a bulletin, a site roster, and the address used to send officers to his residence. He contended that these materials were needed to test Garda World’s arguments and that delaying discovery could prejudice him.
Court’s analysis
The court applied a two-part test for staying discovery while a potentially dispositive motion is pending. It asked whether the motion could dispose of the entire case or the issue targeted by discovery and whether the motion could be decided without additional discovery.
The court found that Garda World’s motion was potentially dispositive because it challenged the only claim asserted against Garda World. The court also took a preliminary look at the motion and concluded that it might succeed. It further found that the motion could be decided without discovery because the amended complaint and Kiyoi’s opposition already contained factual details about the relevant communications and recordings. The court determined that Kiyoi had not identified specific prejudice from the expected four-month delay and emphasized that the stay did not excuse any party from preserving potentially relevant evidence.
Order
The court granted Garda World’s motion to stay initial disclosures and discovery pending resolution of its motion to dismiss. Discovery was stayed as to Garda World and NXP, while other parties remained unserved. The court continued the case-management conference from September 24, 2026, to February 18, 2027, at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference. This order addressed discovery; it did not decide Garda World’s motion to dismiss.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.