United States of America v. Powell et al
Filing
5
ORDER granting Defendant Peggy Powell's motion for extension 4 to the extent it relates to the attorney and case management conferences and initial disclosure requirements. Said deadlines are STAYED for thirty (30) days, within which counsel for Peggy Powell shall enter a formal appearance or Powell shall notify the court in writing of a decision to proceed without counsel. Signed by Jane M Virden on 9/26/12. (ncb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
DELTA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
VS.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:12CV00110-SA-JMV
ROBERT STEVEN POWELL, ET AL.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
Before the court is pro se Defendant Peggy Powell’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to
state a claim and for Additional Time [4]. Specifically, Powell seeks dismissal of this lawsuit
and “an additional 30 days to further respond to this lawsuit so that she can retain a lawyer to
represent her in this matter.” The court has thoroughly considered the motion and finds that
Powell’s motion to dismiss is within the purview of the district judge and will be referred
accordingly. Moreover, Powell is hereby advised that any request for additional time with
regard to briefing of the motion to dismiss–including filing a reply to any response by
Plaintiff–should be directed to the district judge.
With regard to Powell’s request for additional time to secure counsel, the motion is
GRANTED to the extent it relates to the attorney and case management conferences and initial
disclosure requirements. Accordingly, said deadlines are hereby STAYED for thirty (30) days,
within which counsel for Peggy Powell shall enter a formal appearance or Powell shall notify
the court in writing of a decision to proceed without counsel.
SO ORDERED this the 26th day of September, 2012.
/s/ Jane M. Virden
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?