Nam v. Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations

Background

The defendants moved to stay, or pause, discovery while their motion to dismiss was pending. Nam opposed the motion. The court had previously denied the stay motion on December 27, 2021, and then considered a reply filed by the defendants with the court’s permission.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that the defendants had not shown good cause for pausing discovery. In deciding whether a discovery stay is justified, the court considered the breadth of the requested discovery, possible prejudice, and the strength of the pending motion to dismiss.

The court found that the risk of prejudice to Nam was especially important. Material witnesses might leave the United States as part of the ordinary rotation of the Mission’s staff. The court determined that this risk went beyond the ordinary delay caused by a discovery stay. The court also stated that it had not decided the merits of the motion to dismiss, but the defendants had not made a strong showing that Nam’s claims lacked merit.

The court rejected the defendants’ arguments that Nam’s discovery requests were burdensome or untimely as reasons to pause all discovery. It stated that the defendants could object to requests they believed exceeded the scope of the federal discovery rules or the parties’ protective order, after meeting and conferring with Nam.

Disposition

The court denied the defendants’ motion to stay discovery and stated that the order resolved docket numbers 49, 50, 51, and 52. The order did not decide the pending motion to dismiss.