Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Tompkins v. Baca, 3:16-cv-00444-MMD-WGC. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180925f25 Visitors: 18
Filed: Sep. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2018
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, Respondents filed their answer on August 9, 2018 (ECF No. 48), and Petitioner, Nevada prisoner Vallier William Tompkins, was due to file his reply by September 24, 2018. ( See Order entered September 20, 2016 (ECF No. 13) (45 days for reply).) On September 24, 2018, Tompkins filed a motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 49), requesting a 60-day extension of time, to November 23, 2018, for the reply. This would be the
More

ORDER

In this habeas corpus action, Respondents filed their answer on August 9, 2018 (ECF No. 48), and Petitioner, Nevada prisoner Vallier William Tompkins, was due to file his reply by September 24, 2018. (See Order entered September 20, 2016 (ECF No. 13) (45 days for reply).)

On September 24, 2018, Tompkins filed a motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 49), requesting a 60-day extension of time, to November 23, 2018, for the reply. This would be the first extension of this deadline. Tompkins' counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of her obligations in other cases. Respondents do not oppose the motion for extension of time.

The Court finds that Petitioner's 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. The Court will grant this motion for extension of time. However, in light of the amount of time Petitioner will have had to file his reply, the Court will not further extend this deadline absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances.

It is therefore ordered that Petitioner's Motion for an Extension of Time (ECF No. 49) is granted. Petitioner will have until November 23, 2018, to file his reply.

It is further ordered that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered September 20, 2016 (ECF No. 13) will 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