ORDER

GLORIA M. NAVARRO, District Judge.

This habeas matter is before the Court on Petitioner Troy Ray Emanuel's second Motion for Extension of Time (ECF No. 42).

Petitioner initiated this case pro se in June 2016. (ECF No. 1.) The Court denied without prejudice Respondents' first motion to dismiss and provisionally appointed counsel in December 2017. (ECF No. 20.) Counsel requested and received three extensions of time to file an amended petition. (ECF Nos. 23-28.)

Respondents filed the pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 37) on June 10, 2019. Petitioner's counsel was granted a 60-day extension of time to oppose. (ECF Nos. 38, 39.) The Court specifically noted that "further lengthy extensions of time are not likely to be granted." (ECF No. 39.)

The pending motion requests an additional 60 days to oppose the motion to dismiss. Although counsel will be out of the office for most of October, she requests an extension until October 22, 2019. Given the age of this case, counsel for both parties are directed to prioritize the briefing in this case over later-filed matters. Further extensions of time are unlikely to be granted absent compelling circumstances and a strong showing of good cause why the briefing could not be completed within the extended time allowed despite the exercise of due diligence.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Extension of Time (ECF No. 42) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Petitioner will have until September 26, 2019, to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss.