Case 2:18-cv-00763-RFB-NJK Document 34 Filed 08/22/18 Page 1 of 2

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6 WILLIAM PEGG, )
) Case No. 2:18-cv-00763-RFB-NJK
7 Plaintiff, )
) ORDER
8 vs. )
) (Docket No. 30)
9 CONOR MCGREGOR, et al., )
)
10 Defendants. )
)
11

12 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff William Pegg’s motion to compel deposition of Conor

13 McGregor. Docket No. 30. The Court has considered Plaintiff’s motion and Defendants’

14 response. Docket Nos. 30, 31. No reply is necessary. The motion is properly decided without a

15 hearing. See Local Rule 78-1. For the reasons outlined below, Plaintiff’s motion to compel

16 deposition of Conor McGregor, Docket No. 30, is hereby DENIED.

17 Plaintiff asks the Court to compel Defendant McGregor to attend his deposition in Las

18 Vegas on a date certain prior to October 18, 2018. Docket No. 30 at 6. Plaintiff submits that

19 Defendant will be in Las Vegas for a fight on October 6, 2018, and “routinely” trains in Las Vegas

20 for at least a month prior to a fight; therefore, Plaintiff requests that that deposition occur in Las

21 Vegas. Id. Further, Plaintiff submits that, as discovery closes on October 23, 2018, and he may

22 need time to conduct discovery stemming from the deposition, he would like Defendant’s

23 deposition to occur prior to October 18, 2018. Id.

 Case 2:18-cv-00763-RFB-NJK Document 34 Filed 08/22/18 Page 2 of 2

1 In response, Defendants submit that Plaintiff’s motion contains no points and authorities,

2 and no law whatsoever. Docket No. 31 at 2. As such, Defendants submit, the motion violates both

3 the Local Rules and the Court’s order at Docket No. 16. Id. at 3-5. Defendants therefore ask the

4 Court to decline to consider the merits of the motion. Id. at 5. Defendants further ask the Court

5 to sanction Plaintiff for violating the Court’s order for a second time by failing to submit legal

6 authority supporting his request. Id.

7 Local Rule 7-2(d) states, in relevant part, “[t]he failure of a moving party to file points and

8 authorities in support of the motion constitutes a consent to the denial of the motion.” In addition,

9 the Court need not accept Defendants’ invitation to follow the rationale of the Nevada Supreme

10 Court or any other court, as this Court has repeatedly held that it only addresses meaningfully

11 developed arguments. See Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 582 n.3 (D.Nev.

12 2013).

13 Plaintiff’s motion fails to include any citations to legal authority. As such, Plaintiff has

14 consented to the denial of his motion, pursuant to LR 7-2(d). Defendants’ request for sanctions is

15 also fails to include any citations to legal authority. As such, Defendants have consented to the

16 denial of their request, pursuant to LR 7-2(d).

17 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel deposition of Conor McGregor, Docket No. 30,

18 is hereby DENIED. Defendants’ request for sanctions is DENIED.

19 IT IS SO ORDERED.

20 DATED: August 22, 2018.

21

22

23 NANCY J. KOPPE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE