Filed: Dec. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 21, 2018
Summary: ORDER LARRY R. HICKS , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, on August 10, 2018, the Court resolved the respondents' motion to dismiss, granted that motion in part and denied it in part, dismissed certain of the claims of the petitioner, Shelli Rose Dewey, and ordered the respondents to file an answer, responding to Dewey's remaining claims within 90 days — by November 8, 2018. See Order entered August 10, 2018 (ECF No. 69). The Court subsequently granted the respondents a 40-day
Summary: ORDER LARRY R. HICKS , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, on August 10, 2018, the Court resolved the respondents' motion to dismiss, granted that motion in part and denied it in part, dismissed certain of the claims of the petitioner, Shelli Rose Dewey, and ordered the respondents to file an answer, responding to Dewey's remaining claims within 90 days — by November 8, 2018. See Order entered August 10, 2018 (ECF No. 69). The Court subsequently granted the respondents a 40-day ..
More
ORDER
LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge.
In this habeas corpus action, on August 10, 2018, the Court resolved the respondents' motion to dismiss, granted that motion in part and denied it in part, dismissed certain of the claims of the petitioner, Shelli Rose Dewey, and ordered the respondents to file an answer, responding to Dewey's remaining claims within 90 days — by November 8, 2018. See Order entered August 10, 2018 (ECF No. 69). The Court subsequently granted the respondents a 40-day extension of time, to December 18, 2018 (ECF No. 71).
On December 18, 2018, Respondents filed a motion for an extension of time, requesting a further 35-day extension of time, to January 22, 2019, for their answer (ECF No. 72). Respondents' counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of his obligations in other cases, and time away from his office. The petitioner does not oppose the motion for extension of time. The Court finds that Respondents' 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 Enlargement of Time (ECF No. 72) is GRANTED. Respondents will have until January 22, 2019, to file their answer.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered July 20, 2017 (ECF No. 58) will remain in effect.