Price v. Ayers

Filing 198

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 197 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AMENDED PETITION filed by Curtis Floyd Price. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 5/18/12. (sis, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/21/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ROBERT L. MCGLASSON (GA Bar #492638) ATTORNEY AT LAW 1024 Clairemont Avenue Decatur, GA 30030 Telephone: 404 314 7664 Facsimile: 404 879 0005 rlmcglasson@comcast.net KEKER & VAN NEST LLP JAN NIELSEN LITTLE - # 100029 jlittle@kvn.com STEVEN A. HIRSCH - # 171825 shirsch@kvn.com ASIM M. BHANSALI - # 194925 abhansali@kvn.com STEVEN P. RAGLAND - # 221076 sragland@kvn.com CODY S. HARRIS - # 255302 charris@kvn.com 633 Battery Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1809 Telephone: 415 391 5400 Facsimile: 415 397 7188 Attorneys for Petitioner CURTIS FLOYD PRICE 17 DAVID H. ROSE david.rose@doj.ca.gov CA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE 455 Golden Gate Avenue., Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: 415-703-5853 18 Attorney for Respondent Warden Ayers 15 16 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 20 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 21 CURTIS FLOYD PRICE, 22 23 24 Petitioner, v. 25 ROBERT L. AYERS, JR., Warden of San Quentin State Prison, 26 Case No. C-93-0277 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AMENDED PETITION Judge: Hon. Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton Respondent. Date Filed: Jan. 25, 1993 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AMENDED PETITION Case No. C-93-0277 PJH 666144.01 1 2 3 Pursuant to N.D. Civ. L.R. 6-2 and the accompanying Declaration of Jan N. Little, the parties hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, the Court issued an Order [Dkt. 196] on February 2, 2012, requiring the 4 Petitioner to file his amended federal habeas corpus petition within 120 days of that Order; the 5 Respondent to file its answer within 120 days of the filing of Petitioner’s amended petition; and 6 the Petitioner to file any reply 60 days later; 7 WHEREAS, this schedule requires Petitioner to file his amended petition by June 1, 2012; 8 WHEREAS, counsel for Petitioner have multiple scheduling conflicts that would make 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 meeting the June 1, 2012 deadline extremely burdensome, as set forth in the accompanying Declaration of Jan N. Little; WHEREAS, Petitioner therefore would request an additional 90 days to finalize and file his amended habeas corpus petition; and WHEREAS, Petitioner has discussed this continuance with Respondent, who does not oppose the continuance; NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE, through 16 their respective counsel of record, that the June 1, 2012 deadline for Petitioner to file his amended 17 habeas corpus petition be continued to September 1, 2012; that the Respondent’s deadline to file 18 its answer then be extended 135 days (to accommodate the holidays), to January 15, 2013; and 19 that the Petitioner’s deadline to file his reply be continued to March 15, 2013. 20 Dated: May 17, 2012 21 22 By: /s/ Robert L. McGlasson ROBERT L. MCGLASSON 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AMENDED PETITION Case No. C-93-0277 PJH 666144.01 1 Dated: May 17, 2012 KEKER & VAN NEST LLP 2 By: 3 4 5 6 Attorneys for Petitioner CURTIS FLOYD PRICE 7 8 /s/ Jan Nielsen Little JAN NIELSEN LITTLE STEVEN A. HIRSCH ASIM M. BHANSALI STEVEN P. RAGLAND CODY S. HARRIS Dated: May 17, 2012 9 10 By: 11 12 13 /s/ David H. Rose DAVID H. ROSE Deputy California Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Avenue, #11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-3664 Attorneys for Respondent ROBERT L. AYERS, JR., Warden of San Quentin State Prison 14 15 16 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 May 18 Dated: _________________, 2012 By: ____________________________________ HON. PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AMENDED PETITION Case No. C-93-0277 PJH 666144.01

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?