Bradford v. Baker
Filing
231
ORDER granting 230 Motion to Extend Time to File Response to 227 Petitioner's Third Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Attorney General of the State of Nevada answer due 8/23/2024; Jeremy Bean answer due 8/23/2024. In all other r espects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the scheduling order entered April 11, 2024 ECF No. 229 will remain in effect. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 7/10/2024. (For Distribution by law library.)(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CT)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
***
4
JULIUS BRADFORD,
5
Petitioner,
6
v.
7
8
Case No. 2:13-cv-01784-RFB-EJY
ORDER
JEREMY BEAN, et al.,
Respondents.
9
10
In this habeas corpus action the pro se petitioner, Julius Bradford, filed a third
11
amended habeas petition on April 2, 2024. ECF No. 227. Respondents were due to file
12
a response to the third amended petition by July 9, 2024. See ECF No. 229.
13
On July 9, 2024, Respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 230)
14
requesting a 45-day extension, to August 23, 2024. Respondents’ counsel states that
15
the extension of time is necessary because of illness. The Court finds that the motion
16
for extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and
17
that there is good cause for the extension of time they request.
18
It is therefore ordered that Respondents’ Motion for Enlargement of Time (ECF
19
No. 230) is granted. Respondents will have until and including August 23, 2024, to file
20
their response to Petitioner’s third amended petition for writ of habeas corpus. In all
21
other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the scheduling order
22
entered April 11, 2024 (ECF No. 229) will remain in effect.
23
24
DATED THIS 10th day of
July
, 2024.
25
26
27
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
28
1
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?