Shepherd v. Stolc

Filing 4

ORDER by Judge ARMSTRONG granting 3 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/25/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 OAKLAND DIVISION 11 12 TAYLOR ROY SHEPHERD, Case No. C 10-04906 SBA (PR) 13 Petitioner, [PROPOSED] ORDER 14 v. 15 16 BRUNO STOLC, Warden, 17 Respondent. 18 19 On motion or respondent and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time for filing a 20 response to the petition for writ of habeas corpus be, and the same is, extended 60 days to and 21 including July 26, 2011. Petitioner’s reply, if any, shall be filed and served within 60 days or 22 receipt of the answer or motion. 23 24 Dated: 5/24/11 _______________________________ The Honorable Saundra B. Armstrong United States District Judge 25 26 27 28 1 [Proposed] Order (Shepherd v. Stolc - C 10-04906 SBA (PR)) 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 TAYLOR ROY SHEPHERD, 4 Plaintiff, 5 v. 6 BRUNO STOLC et al, 7 Defendant. / 8 9 Case Number: CV10-04906 SBA 10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 11 12 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. 13 14 15 That on May 25, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 16 17 19 Taylor Roy Shepherd F-18739 Red Rock Correctional Center 1752 East Arica Road Eloy, AZ 85131 20 Dated: May 25, 2011 18 21 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 [Proposed] Order (Shepherd v. Stolc - C 10-04906 SBA (PR))

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?