Pierce

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION 11 12 MONRELL D. MURPHY, Case No. 2:21-cv-01789-KJN 13 Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY v. DISCOVERY 15 Judge: Hon. Kendall J. Newman C. PIERCE, et al., Trial Date: None Set Action Filed: September 28, 2021 Defendants. 18 Defendants C. Pierce and J. Lebeck filed a motion to stay discovery pending resolution of their motion to dismiss based on Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 480 (1994), and Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 643 (1997). As set forth below, the undersigned grants defendants’ motion to stay discovery. Legal Standard A party may seek a protective order that stays discovery pending resolution of a dispositive motion such as a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21(b)(6). Wenger v. Monroe, 282 F.3d 1068, 1077 (9th Cir. 2002) (affirming district court’s grant of protective 27 …