Friedman v. Cox et al
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 34 petitioner's proper person emergency motion for an extension of time is GRANTED. Petitioner shall have until 1/3/2018 to file his response to the Court's Order To Show Cause. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 35 petitioner's First Motion to Extend Time is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 12/7/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 2:15-cv-00380-RFB-CWH
JAMES COX, et al.,
This represented habeas matter under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 comes before the Court on
an emergency motion (ECF No. 34) for an extension filed by petitioner in proper person.
Petitioner seeks an extension of time to respond to the order directing that petitioner,
through counsel, show cause why the petition should not be dismissed as a successive
petition. Petitioner is represented by retained counsel. Petitioner maintains that he has been
unable to communicate with counsel telephonically due to sundry circumstances. In this one
instance the Court will permit petitioner to request additional time to respond rather than his
counsel given the explanation offered. In the future all motions MUST be made by
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that petitioner’s proper person emergency motion (ECF
No. 34) for an extension of time is GRANTED. Petitioner shall have until January 3, 2018
to file his response to the Court’s Order To Show Cause.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s First Motion to Extend Time (ECF No. 35)
is DENIED as moot.
The Clerk shall SEND an additional copy of this order to the petitioner at the address
reflected in ECF No. 34 along with a copy of counsel’s notice of appearance (ECF No. 31)
containing her contact information, and the Clerk shall note said additional transmittal to the
petitioner in proper person in a manner consistent with the Clerk’s current practice for such
DATED: December 6, 2017
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States District 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?