Williams v. Camden Old Creek

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHALIECIA WILLIAMS, et al., Case No.: 3:19-cv-691-AJB-AHG

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT

v. PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE

APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION

CAMDEN OLD CREEK, et al.,

TO BEGIN DISCOVERY

Defendants.

16 [ECF No. 17]

19 Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application for Permission to Begin Conducting Discovery. ECF No. 17. Since Plaintiffs’ counsel represented to the Court that this ex parte application would be opposed, the Court set a briefing schedule. ECF No. 18. Afterward, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint. ECF Nos. 10, 19. Because the complaint has been dismissed, the request to conduct discovery is now moot, and the Court finds that pre-complaint discovery is 25 unwarranted in this case. See, e.g., In Re Flash Memory Antitrust Litig., No. C07-0086- 26 SBA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95869, at *18–*21, *24–*29 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008) 27…