Filed: Dec. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 31, 2019
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . Movant is a federal prisoner proceeding through counsel on an amended motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 and a motion for discovery. Respondent was ordered to file a response to the motions to vacate and for discovery. (ECF No. 81.) On December 3, 2019, movant filed a request for a protective order to limit the scope of the implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the dissemination and us
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . Movant is a federal prisoner proceeding through counsel on an amended motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 and a motion for discovery. Respondent was ordered to file a response to the motions to vacate and for discovery. (ECF No. 81.) On December 3, 2019, movant filed a request for a protective order to limit the scope of the implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the dissemination and use..
More
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
Movant is a federal prisoner proceeding through counsel on an amended motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and a motion for discovery. Respondent was ordered to file a response to the motions to vacate and for discovery. (ECF No. 81.) On December 3, 2019, movant filed a request for a protective order to limit the scope of the implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the dissemination and use of any materials or information obtained from former defense counsel. (ECF No. 86.) Because it appeared from the motion that the parties disagreed as to the scope of the waiver, respondent was ordered to respond to the request for protective order. (ECF No. 87.) Respondent then filed a motion for a revised briefing schedule (ECF No. 88), which movant opposed in part (ECF No. 89). The undersigned partially granted the motion for an amended briefing schedule and extended the time to respond to the protective order to January 17, 2020. (ECF No. 90 at 3.) The deadline for responding to the § 2255 motion and motion for discovery was vacated and set for sixty days after the filing of an order ruling on the motion for a protective order. (Id.) Respondent then proceeded to file a reply to the motion for a revised briefing schedule that is in fact a motion for discovery. (ECF No. 91.) Because the reply is an improperly filed motion and the court had already ruled on the motion for a revised briefing schedule at the time the reply was filed, the reply, and movant's response to the reply, will be disregarded. If respondent would like the court to consider its motion for discovery, it may file a proper motion that will be considered in conjunction with movant's motion for a protective order.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Respondent's reply to its motion for a revised briefing schedule (ECF No. 91) and movant's response (ECF No. 93) are disregarded.
2. Respondent shall have until January 17, 2020, to file a proper motion for discovery. Movant shall have fourteen days to respond to the motion and any reply shall be due within seven days of the response.
3. Movant's request for an extension of time to respond to the reply (ECF No. 92) is denied as moot.
