Elawyers Elawyers

STEWART v. NEVEN, 2:09-cv-01063-PMP-GWF. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20120314b69 Visitors: 14
Filed: Mar. 13, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 13, 2012
Summary: ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Following upon Petitioner's unopposed motion (#33) for partial dismissal, which seeks dismissal of the claim that the Court held is unexhausted in this habeas matter, IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's motion (#33) for partial dismissal is GRANTED and that Ground 3 is DISMISSED without prejudice. IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that Respondents shall have thirty (30) days from entry of this order within which to file an Answer to the remaining claims, and that Petit
More

ORDER

PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge.

Following upon Petitioner's unopposed motion (#33) for partial dismissal, which seeks dismissal of the claim that the Court held is unexhausted in this habeas matter,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's motion (#33) for partial dismissal is GRANTED and that Ground 3 is DISMISSED without prejudice.

IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that Respondents shall have thirty (30) days from entry of this order within which to file an Answer to the remaining claims, and that Petitioner thereafter shall have thirty (30) from service of the Answer within which to mail a reply to the Clerk of the Court for filing.

Given the age of the case, requests for extensions of time will be considered only in extraordinary circumstances. Extension requests based upon scheduling conflicts with other cases in this Court generally should be filed in the later-filed case.

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