Schatz v. Hatton
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/19/2017 DENYING 17 Motion for Extension of Time. The matter is now under submission and no further briefing will be permitted. (Henshaw, R)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
KEVIN PAUL SCHATZ,
No. 2:16-cv-02911 JAM GGH
On February 24, 2017, Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss the petition filed by
Petitioner, who is appearing in pro se. ECF No. 8. On March 20, 2017 Petitioner sought an
extension of time to file a response to that Motion, ECF No. 11, which request was granted on
March 24, 2017 extending Petitioner’s time to April 24, 2017. ECF No. 12. On April 24, 2017
Petitioner filed an Opposition Memorandum. ECF No. 13. On May 4, 2017 Respondent
requested addition time to file a Reply, ECF No. 14, which request was granted on May 8, 2017.
ECF No. 15. On June 7, 2017 Respondent filed his Reply. ECF No. 16. The matter was then
placed under submission for review and decision by this court.
On July 7, 2017 Petitioner requested an extension of time to August 7, 2017 to file an
additional Response. ECF No. 17. The Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7,1 however, recognizes
Where feasible and permissible, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply to habeas corpus
actions. Fed.R.Civ.P. 81(a)(4).
only a complaint (petition in this case), an answer, and a reply as permissible pleadings. Rule 12
allows a motion to be made in lieu of an answer. In this case Respondent filed the Motion to
Dismiss in lieu of the Answer which permitted Petitioner to Oppose, which he did in his
Opposition Memorandum found in ECF No. 13, and Respondent one opportunity to Reply to the
Opposition, which he did in ECF No. 16. On June 7, 2017 Respondent filed a Reply to that
Opposition. ECF No. 17. Under Eastern District of California Local Rule No. 230, this
limitation on Motion briefing is made clear: there may be a Motion, an Opposition and a Reply.
There is no additional pleading to be recognized until after the court resolves the pending, fully
Petitioner has now requested an extension of time to permit him to respond to
respondent’s Reply Memorandum. ECF No. 17. In light of the foregoing IT IS HEREBY
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Petitioner’s request for an extension of time to file an additional Memorandum is
The matter is now under submission and no further briefing will be permitted.
Dated: July 19, 2017
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?