Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 22, 2022

Salazar v. National Basketball Association

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:22-cv-07935
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Salazar v. National Basketball Association, Judge Rochon granted the Association’s motion to stay discovery while the dismissal motion is decided.

Who this affects

Michael Salazar, the proposed class, and the National Basketball Association are affected because discovery in the case is paused until the motion to dismiss is decided.

What happened

Salazar v. National Basketball Association is a proposed class action brought by Michael Salazar individually and on behalf of other similarly situated people. The opinion concerns whether discovery should proceed while the National Basketball Association’s motion to dismiss is pending.

The Association argued that discovery should be paused. The court noted that the proposed class action could require extensive discovery, including information from third parties. Salazar identified no harm from a delay other than his desire to begin discovery promptly.

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted the motion to stay discovery. She found good cause because the stay was not likely to last long under the current schedule and the motion to dismiss raised substantial issues, including subject-matter jurisdiction and whether Salazar consented to the Association’s conduct. Discovery will remain paused until the court decides the motion to dismiss.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Salazar v. National Basketball Association · No. 1:22-cv-07935
Judge
Rochon
Date
Dec. 22, 2022

Background

Michael Salazar brought this proposed class action individually and on behalf of other similarly situated people. The National Basketball Association filed a motion to dismiss, and Salazar sought discovery while that motion was pending.

Issue

The issue was whether discovery should be stayed, meaning temporarily paused, until the court ruled on the motion to dismiss.

Court’s reasoning

The court considered the scope of the requested discovery, the burden of responding, possible prejudice to the party opposing the stay, and the strength of the motion supporting the request. It found good cause for a stay because:

- The stay was not likely to be lengthy under the existing briefing schedule. - Discovery in the proposed class action was likely to be extensive and could include discovery from third parties. - Salazar had not identified prejudice from the delay beyond his desire to proceed promptly. - The motion to dismiss raised substantial issues that could result in dismissal of the entire complaint, including whether the court had subject-matter jurisdiction in light of TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez and whether Salazar consented to the National Basketball Association’s conduct.

Ruling

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted the motion to stay discovery. Discovery is stayed pending the decision on the motion to dismiss. The order does not decide the motion to dismiss itself.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.