Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Alcaraz v. Williams, 2:13-cv-00818-JCM-PAL. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20171026f48 Visitors: 9
Filed: Oct. 25, 2017
Latest Update: Oct. 25, 2017
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Following upon the court's prior order directing substitution of counsel, IT IS ORDERED that Gia A McGillivray, Esq., 8275 S. Eastern Ave, Suite 200, Las Vegas, NV 89123, (702) 406-940, is appointed as counsel for petitioner pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3006A(a)(2)(B). Counsel will represent petitioner in all federal proceedings related to this matter, including any appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless allowed to withdraw. IT FURTHER IS ORDERED th
More

ORDER

Following upon the court's prior order directing substitution of counsel,

IT IS ORDERED that Gia A McGillivray, Esq., 8275 S. Eastern Ave, Suite 200, Las Vegas, NV 89123, (702) 406-940, is appointed as counsel for petitioner pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). Counsel will represent petitioner in all federal proceedings related to this matter, including any appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless allowed to withdraw.

IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that petitioner shall have until up to and including one hundred twenty (120) days from entry of this order within which to file an amended petition and/or seek other appropriate relief. Neither the foregoing deadline nor any extension thereof signifies or will signify any implied finding as to the expiration of the federal limitation period and/or of a basis for tolling during the time period established. Petitioner at all times remains responsible for calculating the running of the federal limitation period and timely asserting claims, without regard to any deadlines established or extensions granted herein. That is, by setting a deadline to amend the petition and/or by granting any extension thereof, the court makes no finding or representation that the petition, any amendments thereto, and/or any claims contained therein are not subject to dismissal as untimely. See Sossa v. Diaz, 729 F.3d 1225, 1235 (9th Cir. 2013).

IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that respondents shall file a response to the amended petition, including potentially by motion to dismiss, within sixty (60) days of service of an amended petition and that petitioner may file a reply thereto within thirty (30) days of service of the answer. The response and reply time to any motion filed by either party, including a motion filed in lieu of a pleading, shall be governed instead by LR 7-2(b) of the local rules.

IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that the remaining provisions in the court's prior scheduling order, in ECF No. 39, at 2-3, with regard to the assertion of defenses, the filing of exhibits, and the delivery of hard copies of exhibits to the Reno clerk's office remain in full force and effect

Following entry of Ms. McGillivray as counsel of record on the docket, the clerk of court shall provide counsel, upon her request, with a single set of electronic copies of all prior filings herein in a manner consistent with the clerk's current practice, such as regeneration of notices of electronic filing.

The clerk further shall send a copy of this order to the petitioner in proper person at the last institutional address in the record and reflect said transmittal either via the notice of electronic filing or on the docket, in a manner consistent with the clerk's current practice.

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