Donald R. PATTERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Defendants-Appellees

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by staying discovery where a pending dispositive motion gave the court enough information to ascertain that further discovery was not likely to produce a genuine issue of material fact
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by staying discovery where a pending dispositive motion gave the court enough information to ascertain that further discovery was not likely to produce a genuine issue of material fact
• stating that “[m]atters pertaining to discovery are committed to the sound discretion of the district court”
• holding district court did not abuse its discretion by staying discovery where pending dispositive motions gave court enough information to ascertain further discovery not likely to produce a genuine issue of material fact
• holding district court did not abuse its discretion by staying discovery where pending dispositive motions gave court enough information to ascertain further discovery not likely to produce a genuine issue of material fact
• proper to enter order staying discovery pending resolution of motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment concerning interplay of the ADEA and 5 U.S.C. § 3307

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).