Howard v. State Of Nevada et al

Filing 39

ORDER that 37 Motion to Extend Time to Respond re 29 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. Plaintiff's response must be filed by October 13, 2013. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 10/9/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10

Abdul Howard,
Plaintiff

11
12
13

Case No.: 2:11-cv-01698-JAD-NJK

v.
State of Nevada et al.,

Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to
Extend Time [Doc. 37]

Defendants

14
15

This is a civil rights complaint by Plaintiff Abdul Howard against the State of Nevada et al.

16

essentially alleging that an unintended interlineation in a plea agreement left the plaintiff unwittingly

17

saddled with a sex-offender label, preventing him from being granted parole and causing him to

18

spend extra time in prison. On July 23, 2013, Defendants Philip Kohn and Darren Cox filed a

19

Motion to Dismiss. Doc. 29. On July 29, 2013, Plaintiff successfully moved for an extension of

20

time to respond, and a new deadline of September 27, 2013 was set. Doc. 33. On September 6,

21

2013, Plaintiff moved for a second extension of time, asking for the deadline to be extended to

22

January 10, 2014, “to avoid holidays” and because he is allegedly waiting for documents from the

23

state court. Doc. 37.

24

Plaintiff has not demonstrated how the additional documents are necessary to assist in the

25

preparation of his response to the pending motion to dismiss. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request for an

26

extension until January 10, 2014 [Doc. 37] is DENIED. Plaintiff’s response to Defendants’ motion

27

to dismiss [Doc. 29] must be filed by October 31, 2013. The Court redirects the Plaintiff to the

28

minute order dated July 23, 2013 [Doc. 30], cautioning the Plaintiff pursuant to Klingele v.

1

Eikenberry, 849 F. 2d 409 (9th Cir. 1988), and Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d (9th Cir. 1998), that this

2

is a dispositive motion that may terminate either some portion or all of this lawsuit if granted. The

3

Court reminds Plaintiff to review that minute order notice carefully as it contains important

4

information about what plaintiff needs to do to oppose the motion.

5
6

DATED October 9, 2013.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

_________________________________
JENNIFER A. DORSEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE