Styers, et al v. Stewart, et al

Filing 165

ORDER denying without prejudice 164 Respondents' Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 2/9/12.(DMT)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

James Lynn Styers,
Petitioner,

10
11

vs.

12

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Respondents.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV-98-2244-PHX-JAT
DEATH PENALTY CASE
ORDER

Before the Court is Respondents’ motion for extension of time to February 14 to file a
response to Petitioner’s motion to enter judgment. (Doc. 164.) The motion fails to state the
position of opposing counsel or include a proposed form of order, as required by Local Rule
Civil 7.3 and Section II.G.1 of the Electronic Case File Administrative Policies and
Procedure Manual. Furthermore, it appears the continuance being sought is unnecessary.
Petitioner’s motion was filed on January 25, 2012. Under Local Rule Civil 7.2(c) and Rule
6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Respondents’ response is due February 13, 2012.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents’ Motion for Extension of Time
(Doc. 164) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
DATED this 9th day of February, 2012.