Williams v. Wong

Filing 103

ORDER Granting Respondent's Unopposed Motion 102 for First Extension of Time to File Opposition Brief; ORDER Further Modifying Scheduling Orders, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/13/19. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BOB RUSSELL WILLIAMS, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 15 Case No. 1:09-cv-01068-DAD DEATH PENALTY CASE ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION BRIEF (Doc. No. 102) v. RON DAVIS, Warden of California State Prison at San Quentin, Respondent. 16 ORDER FURTHER MODIFYING SCHEDULING ORDERS (Doc. Nos. 69 & 96) 17 18 19 20 Before the court is a motion by respondent warden Ron Davis, through counsel Deputy 21 Attorney General Craig Meyers, to extend the current June 18, 2019 deadline for filing his 22 opposition brief on the application of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to all claims in the petition to August 23 19, 2019. This extension of time, respondent’s first, is necessary due to the voluminous 24 pleadings and record, the number and complexity of issues raised, and counsel’s responsibilities 25 in other matters. 26 Mr. Meyers represents that counsel for petitioner, Assistant Federal Defender Harry 27 Simon, does not oppose the requested extension. 28 ///// 1 1 The court finds good cause to grant the instant motion and thereupon further modify the 2 court’s schedule in this case. 3 Accordingly, 4 1. Respondent’s unopposed motion for first extension of time to file and serve his 5 opposition brief on the application of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to all claims in the 6 petition is granted to and including August 19, 2019. 7 2. Petitioner’s reply brief on the application of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to all claims in the petition shall be filed and served by not later than June 19, 2020. 8 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 13, 2019 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?