Ghost in the Machine, Inc. v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.

Background

The court considered Defendants’ request for a stay of discovery—that is, an order temporarily pausing the exchange of information in the case—until the court ruled on Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Ghost in the Machine opposed the request and wanted discovery to proceed.

Legal standard

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), a court may stay discovery when the moving party shows good cause. The court explained that filing a motion to dismiss can support a stay, but discovery should not automatically be paused merely because such a motion has been filed. The court considers the breadth and burden of the requested discovery and the strength of the motion to dismiss. A stay may be appropriate when the moving party makes a strong showing that the plaintiff’s claims are unmeritorious.

Ruling

Judge Vernon S. Broderick found that Defendants had not made the required strong showing that Ghost in the Machine’s claims were unmeritorious. The court nevertheless found that conducting full discovery while the motion to dismiss was pending would impose a significant burden. The court therefore denied Defendants’ request for a stay of discovery. It also ordered the parties to meet and confer about the scope of discovery while the motion to dismiss remained pending. If they could not agree, they could seek court intervention by submitting a joint letter under the judge’s individual rules.