Filed: Dec. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER HOWARD D. McKIBBEN , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, on August 6, 2018, the Court ruled on the respondents' motion to dismiss, granting it in part and denying it in part, dismissing certain of the claims of the pro se petitioner, Nathan Williams, and ordering the respondents to file an answer responding to the remaining claims. See Order entered August 6, 2018 (ECF No. 26). After a 45-day extension of time (ECF No. 28), Respondents' answer was due on December 20, 20
Summary: ORDER HOWARD D. McKIBBEN , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, on August 6, 2018, the Court ruled on the respondents' motion to dismiss, granting it in part and denying it in part, dismissing certain of the claims of the pro se petitioner, Nathan Williams, and ordering the respondents to file an answer responding to the remaining claims. See Order entered August 6, 2018 (ECF No. 26). After a 45-day extension of time (ECF No. 28), Respondents' answer was due on December 20, 201..
More
ORDER
HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge.
In this habeas corpus action, on August 6, 2018, the Court ruled on the respondents' motion to dismiss, granting it in part and denying it in part, dismissing certain of the claims of the pro se petitioner, Nathan Williams, and ordering the respondents to file an answer responding to the remaining claims. See Order entered August 6, 2018 (ECF No. 26). After a 45-day extension of time (ECF No. 28), Respondents' answer was due on December 20, 2018.
On December 20, 2018, Respondents filed a motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 29), requesting a second extension of time, this one 33 days, to January 22, 2019 (January 21 is a holiday). Respondents' counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of her obligations in other cases. The Court finds that Respondents' motion for extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause for the extension of time requested.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents' Motion for Enlargement of Time (ECF No. 29) is GRANTED. Respondents will have until January 22, 2019, to file their answer.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, after the respondents file an answer, the petitioner will have 60 days to file a reply.
