Shobe v. Norman

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER:IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioners Request for More Time 10 is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is granted leave to refile his request with an explanation for his need for additional time and how much additional time he needs. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 1/3/2013. (RAK)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION EARL D. SHOBE, JR., Petitioner, v. JEFF NORMAN, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 4:12-CV-2108-JAR MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Request for More Time. [ECF No. 10] On November 9, 2012, Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Doc. No. 1) The Court entered a Case Management Order on November 20, 2012, ordering Respondent to show cause, in writing and within forty-five (45) days, why the relief requested in the petition should not be granted. (Doc. No. 6) The Court further ordered Petitioner to file any reply within sixty (60) days of the date the answer to the petition was filed. (Id.) Respondent filed his Response to Order to Show Cause on December 17, 2012. (Doc. No. 9) Thus, Petitioner’s reply is due no later than February 17, 2013. Although Petitioner filed his request for more time on January 2, 2013, he does not provide the Court with an explanation for his need for additional time or how much additional time he needs. The Court will, therefore, deny Petitioner’s request and grant him leave to refile. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Request for More Time [10] is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is granted leave to refile his request with an explanation for his need for additional time and how much additional time he needs. Dated this 3rd day of January, 2013. JOHN A. ROSS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?