Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Lopez v. Muniz, C 17-03390 WHA. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180212484 Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 09, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WILLIAM ALSUP , District Judge . On February 5, respondent William Muniz requested a 60-day extension of time in which to file a response to the order to show cause (Dkt. No. 8). Despite the fact that petitioner Orlando Lopez is represented by counsel, respondent's application states that petitioner is representing himself, and for that reason he did not attempt to contact petitioner in connection with this request. Petit
More

ORDER GRANTING IN PART RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

On February 5, respondent William Muniz requested a 60-day extension of time in which to file a response to the order to show cause (Dkt. No. 8). Despite the fact that petitioner Orlando Lopez is represented by counsel, respondent's application states that petitioner is representing himself, and for that reason he did not attempt to contact petitioner in connection with this request. Petitioner, however, has not filed an objection to the requested extension.

Good cause appearing, respondent shall have until MARCH 29, 2018 to respond to the order to show cause. If respondent files an answer, petitioner may file a traverse within THIRTY DAYS of the date respondent's answer is filed. If respondent files a motion to dismiss, petitioner shall file an opposition (or statement of non-opposition) within THIRTY DAYS of the date the motion is filed, and respondent shall file a reply within FIFTEEN DAYS of any opposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer