Dryden v. Dzurenda, 2:17-cv-00704-JAD-NJK. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20181016a55
Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 15, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 15, 2018
Summary: Order directing response to petition JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Having reviewed petitioner Bryan Dryden's first amended petition 1 as required by Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, I direct the respondents to file a response. IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that respondents have until November 29, 2018, to answer or otherwise respond to the amended petition. If that response is an answer, respondents must comply with Rule 5 of the R
Summary: Order directing response to petition JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Having reviewed petitioner Bryan Dryden's first amended petition 1 as required by Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, I direct the respondents to file a response. IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that respondents have until November 29, 2018, to answer or otherwise respond to the amended petition. If that response is an answer, respondents must comply with Rule 5 of the Ru..
More
Order directing response to petition
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
Having reviewed petitioner Bryan Dryden's first amended petition1 as required by Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, I direct the respondents to file a response.
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that respondents have until November 29, 2018, to answer or otherwise respond to the amended petition. If that response is an answer, respondents must comply with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, and petitioner will have 45 days from the date on which the answer is served to file a reply; if that response is a motion, petitioner will have 28 days from the date of service of the motion to file a response to the motion, and respondents then will have 14 days to file a reply.
Respondents must raise all potential affirmative defenses—including lack of exhaustion and procedural default—in their initial responsive pleading. Successive motions to dismiss will not be entertained.
FootNotes
1. ECF No. 15.
Source: Leagle
