Opinion
CV 123-066
12-08-2023
KATHRYN M. WALKER, Plaintiff, v. CHRISTINE WORMUTH, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Army; and THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Defendants.
ORDER
J. RANDAL HALL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
In the present case, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 17.) Prior to Plaintiff's motion, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. (Doc. 9.) Now, Defendant Wormuth asks the Court to stay the time to respond to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment pending the Court's ruling on Defendants' motion to dismiss. (Doc. 19.) Defendants' responses to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment are due on December 20, 2023.
Because Defendants' motion to dismiss concerns the Court's jurisdiction and could be dispositive of the entire litigation, the Court HEREBY STAYS Defendants' deadline to respond to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 17) until the Court has addressed the merits of Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 9) . If Defendants' motion to dismiss is denied, Defendants SHALL FILE a response to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment within TWENTY-ONE (21) DAYS of the Court's Order addressing the motion to dismiss.
The Court notes the motion to stay is filed only on Defendant Christine Wormuth's behalf. (Doc. 19, at 1.) Recognizing that both Defendants are represented by the same counsel and their joint motion to dismiss forms the basis for the stay, the Court grants the stay as to both Defendants.