Filed: Oct. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 19, 2018
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . Respondents filed their answer in this habeas corpus action on September 5, 2018 (ECF No. 29). The Petitioner, Daniel Page, was then to file a reply to the answer by October 22, 2018. (ECF No. 10 (45 days for reply).) On October 19, 2018, Page filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 30). Page requested a 45-day extension of time—to December 21, 2018—for his reply. This would be the first extension of this deadline. Page's counsel states that t
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . Respondents filed their answer in this habeas corpus action on September 5, 2018 (ECF No. 29). The Petitioner, Daniel Page, was then to file a reply to the answer by October 22, 2018. (ECF No. 10 (45 days for reply).) On October 19, 2018, Page filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 30). Page requested a 45-day extension of time—to December 21, 2018—for his reply. This would be the first extension of this deadline. Page's counsel states that th..
More
ORDER
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
Respondents filed their answer in this habeas corpus action on September 5, 2018 (ECF No. 29). The Petitioner, Daniel Page, was then to file a reply to the answer by October 22, 2018. (ECF No. 10 (45 days for reply).)
On October 19, 2018, Page filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 30). Page requested a 45-day extension of time—to December 21, 2018—for his reply. This would be the first extension of this deadline. Page's 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 Page'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.
It is therefore ordered that the petitioner's motion for extension of time (ECF No. 30) is granted. The Petitioner will have until December 21, 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 December 15, 2016 (ECF No. 10) will remain in effect.
