Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

NIKA v. BAKER, 3:09-cv-00178-JCM-WGC. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20160119a52
Filed: Jan. 15, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 15, 2016
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . In this capital habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Avram Vineto Nika, filed a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus on August 3, 2015 (ECF No. 73). Respondents were originally due to respond to Nika's second amended petition by November 13, 2015. See Order entered September 10, 2015 (ECF No. 84). On November 18, 2015, the court granted respondents a 60-day extension of time, to January 12, 2016 (ECF No. 86). On January 11, 2016, resp
More

ORDER

In this capital habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Avram Vineto Nika, filed a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus on August 3, 2015 (ECF No. 73). Respondents were originally due to respond to Nika's second amended petition by November 13, 2015. See Order entered September 10, 2015 (ECF No. 84). On November 18, 2015, the court granted respondents a 60-day extension of time, to January 12, 2016 (ECF No. 86).

On January 11, 2016, respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 88), requesting a second extension of time for their response — another 60 days, to March 14, 2016. Respondents' counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of personnel changes at the Office of the Attorney General, and because of his obligations in other cases. Petitioner's counsel does not object.

The court finds that the motion for extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause for the extension of time requested.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondents' motion for extension of time (ECF No. 88) is GRANTED. Respondents shall have until and including March 14, 2016, to file and serve an answer or other response to petitioner's second amended habeas petition.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered June 18, 2015 (ECF No. 68) shall remain in effect.

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