Toston v. Woods, 2:18-cv-02424-GMN-BNW. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20200117g04
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jan. 15, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 15, 2020
Summary: ORDER GLORIA M. NAVARRO , District Judge . Respondents have filed a motion for enlargement of time (first request) (ECF No. 29). The court finds good cause for an extension of time to file a reply and grants the motion. Also on the docket is petitioner's unopposed motion for extension of time (ECF No. 26). The document actually is titled as a supplement to the amended motion to extend time (ECF No. 25), which the court already has granted (ECF No. 27). The court need take no further action
Summary: ORDER GLORIA M. NAVARRO , District Judge . Respondents have filed a motion for enlargement of time (first request) (ECF No. 29). The court finds good cause for an extension of time to file a reply and grants the motion. Also on the docket is petitioner's unopposed motion for extension of time (ECF No. 26). The document actually is titled as a supplement to the amended motion to extend time (ECF No. 25), which the court already has granted (ECF No. 27). The court need take no further action ..
More
ORDER
GLORIA M. NAVARRO, District Judge.
Respondents have filed a motion for enlargement of time (first request) (ECF No. 29). The court finds good cause for an extension of time to file a reply and grants the motion.
Also on the docket is petitioner's unopposed motion for extension of time (ECF No. 26). The document actually is titled as a supplement to the amended motion to extend time (ECF No. 25), which the court already has granted (ECF No. 27). The court need take no further action on the unopposed motion (ECF No. 26), because it was a request for additional time to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss, and petitioner has filed that opposition (ECF No. 28).
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that respondents' motion for enlargement of time (first request) (ECF No. 29) is GRANTED. Respondents will have up to and including January 28, 2020, to file their reply to petitioner's opposition to the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28).
IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that no further action need be taken on petitioner's unopposed motion for extension of time (ECF No. 26).
Source: Leagle
