COOK v. WARDEN OF BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, 0:15-02987-JFA. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20161207e14
Visitors: 12
Filed: Dec. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr. , District Judge . This motion is before the court on Petitioner, Darryl T. Cook's ("Cook"), motion for extension of time to respond to the Report and Recommendation prepared by the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case. (ECF No. 67). The Court has previously ruled on this Report and Recommendation twice and subsequently vacated both orders after Cook cited numerous reasons for delay, including severe weather in South Carolina, a prison transfer, and an extend
Summary: ORDER JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr. , District Judge . This motion is before the court on Petitioner, Darryl T. Cook's ("Cook"), motion for extension of time to respond to the Report and Recommendation prepared by the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case. (ECF No. 67). The Court has previously ruled on this Report and Recommendation twice and subsequently vacated both orders after Cook cited numerous reasons for delay, including severe weather in South Carolina, a prison transfer, and an extende..
More
ORDER
JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge.
This motion is before the court on Petitioner, Darryl T. Cook's ("Cook"), motion for extension of time to respond to the Report and Recommendation prepared by the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case. (ECF No. 67). The Court has previously ruled on this Report and Recommendation twice and subsequently vacated both orders after Cook cited numerous reasons for delay, including severe weather in South Carolina, a prison transfer, and an extended hospital stay. (ECF No. 55, 63). Despite numerous extensions, Cook again cites a delay in receiving his legal documents after a prison transfer and requests an additional extension to respond to the Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, Cook's motion for an extension of time is GRANTED. However, the Court would like to make clear that this is the last extension of time that will be granted. Petitioner has 30 days from the date of entry of this order to file his response. After that time period has expired, this Court will promptly rule on the Report and Recommendation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
