There are important differences between state and federal courts. There are important differences even within those court systems. For instance, the federal courts open discovery in one way, but Nevada state courts open it another way.
A local decision recently reminded the parties of that difference. An order to show cause was issued because a defendant failed to participate “in the preparation and filing of the amended discovery plan.” The defendant explained “it is not required to participate in discovery since it is challenging the sufficiency of service and the Court does not have jurisdiction over it as a result.” That argument was rejected in three simple sentences and a long string cite. “Defendant is wrong. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for automatic or blanket stays of discovery when a potentially dispositive motion is pending. That remains true even where a defendant challenges service of process or personal jurisdiction.”
 Ditech Fin., LLC v. Antelope Homeowners’ Ass’n, No. 2:17-cv-02029, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179221 (D. Nev. Oct. 30, 2017).