DOUGLAS et al v. LALUMIERE et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
JOEL DOUGLAS, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs )
)
v. ) 2:20-cv-00227-JDL
)
SCOTT LALUMIERE, et al., )
)
Defendants )
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motions for leave to conduct limited
discovery. (Motions for Limited Discovery, ECF Nos. 165, 202.) Plaintiffs filed their
motions after Defendants Andre Bellucci and BLR Capital, LLC each moved to dismiss
Plaintiffs’ amended complaint. (Motions, ECF No. 147, 197.) Citing New England Data
Services, Inc. v. Becher, 829 F.2d 286, 290 (1st Cir. 1987), Plaintiffs seek leave to conduct
discovery to the extent necessary to satisfy the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 9(b) before the Court considers the defendants’ motions to dismiss.
Plaintiffs previously filed motions to conduct limited discovery in response to
motions to dismiss filed by other defendants in this matter. (Motions for Limited
Discovery, ECF Nos. 46, 103, 107, 113, 129, 136, 143, 145.) The Court denied without
prejudice Plaintiffs’ prior motions, concluding that “Plaintiffs’ requests to conduct
discovery are more appropriately evaluated when the Court, as part of its assessment of
Defendants’ motions to dismiss, determines whether Rule 9(b) has been satisfied and
whether Plaintiffs have otherwise stated an actionable claim.” (Order at 3, ECF No. 156.)
Case 2:20-cv-00227-LEW Document 213 Filed 04/06/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
Here, for the same reasons discussed in its January 21, 2021 Order, the Court denies
Plaintiffs’ motions without prejudice. (ECF Nos. 165, 202.) The Court will consider
Plaintiffs’ requests as part of the Court’s assessment of each defendant’s pending motion
to dismiss.1
NOTICE
Any objections to this Order shall be filed in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72.
/s/ John C. Nivison
U.S. Magistrate Judge
Dated this 6th day of April, 2021.
1 Plaintiffs requested leave to conduct discovery in their responses to the motions to dismiss. (Response
at 18, ECF No. 164; Response at 1, ECF No. 201.)
Case 2:20-cv-00227-LEW Document 213 Filed 04/06/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>