PETITIONER'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS UNTIMELY AND RESET THE HEARING DATE

BETH LABSON FREEMAN, District Judge.

Petitioner, Carl Skidmore, by and through his counsel of record, hereby moves this Court for a thirty (30) day extension of the deadline to file his opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss petition for writ of habeas corpus as untimely. Skidmore v. Lizarraga, Case No. 14-422-BLF, General Docket ("Doc") #16. Granting this extension would extend the time for filing petitioner's opposition from September 24, 2015 to October 24, 2015.

Petitioner also moves this Court to reset the hearing date for the motion from October 29, 2015 to January 21, 2016.

This motion is based on the record in this case and the attached Declaration of James Thomson. Respondent does not oppose this motion.

DECLARATION OF COUNSEL IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS UNTIMELY

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and before this Court. I have been retained to represent petitioner in this matter.

2. On September 17, 2014, petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the California Supreme Court. California Supreme Court Case No. S221277.

3. On September 18, 2014, petitioner filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus in this case. Doc #1. On September 19, 2014, petitioner filed a motion to stay and abey proceedings to exhaust potentially meritorious claims. Doc #4. On October 20, 2014, this Court granted petitioner's motion to stay. Doc #5.

4. On January 14, 2015, the California Supreme Court denied petitioner's state petition for writ of habeas corpus.

5. On February 13, 2015, petitioner filed a motion to reopen the case and lift the stay. Doc #8. On February 25, 2015, this Court granted the motion to reopen the case and lift the stay. Doc #9. The Court ordered respondent to "show cause why the petition should not be granted based on" seven cognizable claims for relief within 91 days of the order. Id. The Court also stated that respondent may file "a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of an answer" within 91 days of the order. Id. The Court further ordered petitioner to "serve respondent and the respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California, with a copy of this order and the petition with all attachments." Id.

6. On March 5, 2015, petitioner filed a notice of compliance with the February 25, 2015 Court Order. Doc #10.

7. On July 13, 2015, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition for writ of habeas corpus as untimely. Doc #16.

8. On August 4, 2015, petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file the opposition to the motion to dismiss. Doc #17. On August 20, 2015, this Court granted the motion. The opposition to the motion to dismiss is currently due on September 24, 2015. Doc #9.

9. I am moving to extend that deadline by thirty (30) days so that I may research issues and prepare the opposition. I believe that good cause supports extending the time.

10. In addition to the work performed in this case, I have been actively litigating a number of capital and non capital complex cases in the Northern District of California and elsewhere.

a. In United States v. Williams, N.D. Cal. Case No. 3:13-cr-00764-WHO, the defendant is charged with RICO conspiracy and capital crimes.

b. In United States v. Houff, N.D. Cal. Case No. 4:12-00574-PJH, the defendant is charged with RICO conspiracy and murder.

c. In Perez-Gutierrez v. Baker, Second Judicial District Court (Nevada) Case No. CR94-1795B, the capital habeas petitioner is set to start the second part of an evidentiary hearing.

d. In In re Noel Jackson, Riverside Superior Court Case No. RIC-475367, the capital habeas petitioner is set to start the evidentiary hearing in his Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) intellectual disability case.

e. In Petrosian v. United States, Court of Appeals Case No. 14-55186, the appellant filed his opening brief.

f. In Roeung v. Uribe, Jr., USSC Case No. 15-5468, the habeas petitioner filed his petition for writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court.

g. In Kills On Top v. Kirkegard, USSC Case No. 15-5834, the habeas petitioner filed his petition for writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court.

11. I have exercised and will continue to exercise diligence with respect to this case.

12. The hearing on the motion to dismiss is scheduled for October 29, 2015. I am unavailable to attend that hearing as I am a presenter at the Mexican Capital Legal Assistance Program training conference in Santa Fe, New Mexico. I am requesting that the hearing be reset to January 21, 2016.

13. On September 16, 2015, counsel for respondent, Deputy Attorney General Gregory Ott informed my office that he does not oppose my requests for an extension of time and to reset the hearing date to January 21, 2016.

I declare under the penalty perjury, as defined by the laws of the United States and California, that the foregoing is true and correct.

[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS UNTIMELY AND RESET THE HEARING DATE

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that Petitioner may have until October 24, 2015 to file with the Court and serve on respondent an opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss, and respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner a reply within fourteen (14) days of the date any opposition is filed.

It is further ordered that the hearing on the motion to dismiss is reset to January 21, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.