Vargas v. Knowles

Filing 179

ORDER GRANTING re 178 Stipulation re Extension of Time to File Reply Brief. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 9/10/08. (dlm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/11/2008)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JERRY Y. FONG, ESQ. (SBN 99673) CAREY & CAREY 706 COWPER STREET P.O. BOX 1040 PALO ALTO, CA 94302-1040 650/328-5510 650/853-3632 fax Attorneys for Petitioner EDDIE M. VARGAS, SR. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EDDIE M. VARGAS, SR., Petitioner, vs. MIKE KNOWLES, Warden, Respondent. | | | | | | | | | | NO. C-03-2930 JF (PR) STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF -------------AND [proposed] ORDER THEREON IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between JERRY Y. FONG, ESQ., counsel for Petitioner EDDIE M. VARGAS, SR., and GREGORY A. OTT, ESQ., counsel for Respondent, MIKE KNOWLES, that Petitioner's Reply Brief to the government's Opposition to Motion to Stay Federal Habeas Proceedings (set for hearing on September 26, 2008, at 9:00 am), currently due to be filed on Friday, September 12, be served and filed on Tuesday, September 16. Petitioner's counsel has been tied up on the writing of an appellate opening brief in another case, and needs the extra time to devote to the writing of the Reply Brief. DATED: September 9, 2008 CAREY & CAREY /s/ JERRY Y. FONG, Attorneys for Petitioner EDDIE M. VARGAS, SR. 1 STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DATED: 9/10 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that the date currently set for Petitioner's counsel to file the Reply Brief be extended to September 16, 2008. ORDER DATED: 9/9 , 2008 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL /s/ GREGORY A. OTT , 2008 HON. JEREMY FOGEL U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 2 STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF

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?