The opinion
een VIVE
| ELECTRONICALLY FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ae
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED:_5/29/2024
CARMAN WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO STAY
-against- 23-CV-5460 (AS) (KHP)
NYC BOARD OF ELECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
KATHARINE H. PARKER, United States Magistrate Judge.
On May 21, 2024, Plaintiff filed a letter (ECF No. 84) requesting a stay of proceedings so
that she may seek review of a discovery order issued on May 13, 2024. (ECF No. 80.)
“The power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to
control the disposition of the causes on its own docket with economy of time and effort for
itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” See Poppel v. Rockefeller Univ. Hosp., No. 19-CV-1403
(ALC), 2019 WL 3334476, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2019). In evaluating whether to grant a motion
to stay proceedings, courts consider: “(1) the private interests of the plaintiffs in proceeding
expeditiously with the civil litigation as balanced against the prejudice to the plaintiffs if
delayed; (2) the private interest of and burden on the defendants; (3) the interests of the
courts; (4) the interests of persons not parties to the civil litigation; and (5) the public interest.”
Rankine v. Levi Strauss & Co., 674 F. Supp. 3d 57 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) (quoting Kappel v. Comfort, 914
F.Supp. 1056, 1058 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)). The “basic goal is to avoid prejudice.” LaSala v. Needham &
Co., 399 F. Supp. 2d 421, 427 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (internal citation omitted). The movant bears the
burden of establishing the need for a stay of proceedings. See Luv N' Care, Ltd. v. Regent Baby
Products Corp., 2014 WL 572524, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 13, 2014).
Here, Plaintiff seeks a stay for the sole purpose of filing an objection to a discovery
order. A stay is not necessary for this. Plaintiff may file her objections to the extent permitted
by applicable rules and, if she is successful in her objection in whole or in part, the Court will
extend discovery for specific purposes based on any ruling on her objection. Therefore, there is
no prejudice with maintaining the current deadlines. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for a stay is
DENIED.
The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 29, 2024 Kethavce H faker
New York, New York KATHARINE H. PARKER
United States Magistrate Judge