Williams v. Humphrey

Filing 45

ORDER denying 44 Motion to Stay; granting 44 Motion for Extension of Time. Responses due by 11/2/2015. Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr on 9/30/15. (bcw)

Download PDF
77IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT' OR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA' SAVANNAH DIVISION SEP 30 7 1', 1 5 JOSEPH WILLIAMS, CL ER Petitioner, CASE NO. CV412-106 V. BRUCE CHATMAN, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Respondent. ORDER Before the Court is Petitioner's Motion to Stay Pleading Schedule or, in the Alternative, For an Additional Thirty Days to File a Motion for Evidentiary Hearing. (Doc. 44.) Petitioner requests additional time to reply because his counsel is preparing for briefing and oral argument in the Eleventh Circuit.' After careful consideration, Petitioner's request for an extension is GRANTED. As a result, Petitioner's motion for an evidentiary hearing is 1 The Court notes that Petitioner requested a stay of the pleading schedule because Petitioner had filed a Motion to Reconsider (Doc. 44) this Court's July 26, 2013 and September 3, 2015 orders denying discovery. (Doc. 35, Doc. 42.) Petitioner stated that the Court "contemplated" a motion for reconsideration and should therefore further extend the filing deadlines. However, Petitioner's characterization of the Court's order is inaccurate. The Court did not invite a motion for reconsideration of its previous orders on discovery. Instead, the Court merely noted that a motion for reconsideration would be timely if such motion was filed after the Court's entering of its September order addressing discovery. (Doc. 35 at 15.) due no later than November 2, 2015. Petitioner should be aware that the Court will grant no further extensions in regards to this filing. All other deadlines provided in the scheduling order (Doc. 26) remain unchanged. SO ORDERED this 3- day of September 2015. WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

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?