UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
March 11, 2011
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
JACQUES SERVIN ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard W. Roberts United States District Judge
Plaintiff Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America brings this action against Jacques Servin and others asserting claims including trademark infringement and dilution, unfair competition, cyber-piracy, and unfair trade practices. The defendants have moved for a stay of discovery and the disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. They argue that discovery in this case is likely to be extensive and costly, and that the defendants should not be exposed to discovery expenses since they also have pending a motion to dismiss which, if granted, would terminate the litigation. (Defs.' Mot. to Stay Discovery and Rule 26 Disclosures at 1-3.) The Chamber of Commerce opposes, arguing that the Chamber is at risk of ongoing harm because the defendants expressly refused to cease their purportedly wrongful conduct, and that the defendants have not assured the Chamber that they will preserve relevant-evidence. (Pl.'s Mem. in Opp'n to Defs.' Mot. to Stay Discovery and Rule 26 Disclosures ("Pl.'s Mem.") at 10-11.)
In this case, no discovery scheduling order has been entered yet in light of the pendency of the dispositive motion filed by the defendants.*fn1 Moreover, plaintiffs aver, and defendants do not dispute, that the parties have not conferred about the discovery that is necessary, and defense counsel have not agreed to meet to discuss the scope of discovery. (Pl.'s Mem. at 9-10.) Thus, a request to stay discovery appears premature. In addition, the defendants have asserted that they have ceased the conduct specifically complained about by the Chamber of Commerce and that "defendants' counsel are properly abiding by all legal and ethical guidelines and preserving all relevant evidence to the best of their knowledge and ability."*fn2 (See Defs.' Reply at -3-4-5.) With no need demonstrated at this point for a stay, the defendants' motion will be denied. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that defendants' motion  to stay discovery and Rule 26 disclosures be, and hereby is, DENIED without prejudice. It is furtherORDERED that the plaintiff's motion  for leave to file a surreply be, and hereby is, DENIED.