Floyd v. Houston

Filing 92

ORDER granting the petitioner's 91 Motion to Extend pleading and other dates. The petitioner shall have to on or before April 29, 2016, to file an amended petition. The respondent shall have thirty days thereafter to file an answer and al l relevant designated state court records. After the respondent files an answer, the petitioner shall have forty-five days to file an opening brief. The respondent shall have forty-five days thereafter to file a responsive brief. The petitioner shall have thirty days thereafter to file a reply brief. Amended Complaint due by 4/29/2016. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA WILLIAM C. FLOYD, JR., Petitioner, 8:13CV195 vs. ORDER SCOTT FRAKES, Director, Nebraska Department of Corrections, Respondent. This matter is before the court on the petitioner’s Motion to Extend Pleading and Other Dates (Filing No. 91). The petitioner requests the court extend the deadline to file an amended petition set forth in the court’s earlier order (Filing No. 89) due to the size of the record and complexity of the issues. Upon consideration and for good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The petitioner’s Motion to Extend Pleading and Other Dates (Filing No. 91) is granted. 2. The petitioner shall have to on or before April 29, 2016, to file an amended petition. The respondent shall have thirty days thereafter to file an answer and all relevant designated state court records. 3. After the respondent files an answer, the petitioner shall have forty-five days to file an opening brief. The respondent shall have forty-five days thereafter to file a responsive brief. The petitioner shall have thirty days thereafter to file a reply brief. Dated this 9th day of February, 2016. BY THE COURT: s/ Thomas D. Thalken 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?