Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Mayo v. Gentry, 2:16-cv-00599-JAD-GWF. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20171212c41 Visitors: 6
Filed: Dec. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 11, 2017
Summary: Order [ECF No. 39] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, respondents were granted a 30-day extension of time to file an answer, making December 1, 2017, their new deadline. 1 On December 1, 2017, another time-extension motion was filed, this time requesting four additional days because counsel for the respondents had obligations in other cases that inhibited her from answering sooner. 2 Counsel answered four days later. I find that the motion for an extensi
More

Order

[ECF No. 39]

In this habeas corpus action, respondents were granted a 30-day extension of time to file an answer, making December 1, 2017, their new deadline.1 On December 1, 2017, another time-extension motion was filed, this time requesting four additional days because counsel for the respondents had obligations in other cases that inhibited her from answering sooner.2 Counsel answered four days later.

I find that the motion for an extension of time was made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause for the requested time extension. I will therefore grant the motion for an extension of time and treat the answer as timely filed.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondents' motion for enlargement of time [ECF No. 39] is GRANTED, and the answer will be treated as timely filed. Mayo's reply is due February 5, 2018.

FootNotes


1. ECF No. 38.
2. Id.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer