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)
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?