Smith v. Baker et al

Filing 55

ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that 52 , 54 respondents' motions for extensions of time are GRANTED. Respondents shall have until and including 1/26/17, to file their reply in support of their 35 motion to dismiss, and their responses to the 47 motion for leave to conduct discovery, 48 the motion for evidentiary hearing, and 50 the motion for stay and abeyance. Petitioner will then have 20 days to file replies in support of his motion for leave to conduct discovery, motion for evidentiary hearing, and motion for stay and abeyance. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 1/10/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8

MONTRAIL D. SMITH,

9

Petitioner,

10

vs.

11

TIMOTHY FILSON, et al.,

12

2:15-cv-00487-KJD-VCF

Respondents.

ORDER

13

_____________________________/

14
15

In this habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Montrail D. Smith, filed a first amended petition

16

for writ of habeas corpus on April 11, 2016 (ECF No. 24). The respondents filed a motion to

17

dismiss (ECF No. 35) on August 10, 2016. On December 19, 2016, Smith filed a response to the

18

motion to dismiss (ECF No. 43), a motion for leave to conduct discovery (ECF No. 47), and a

19

motion for evidentiary hearing (ECF No. 48). On December 20, 2016, Smith filed a motion for stay

20

and abeyance (ECF No. 50).

21

Respondents’ reply regarding the motion to dismiss, and their responses to the motion for

22

leave to conduct discovery and motion for evidentiary hearing, were due January 9, 2017. See Order

23

entered June 30, 2017 (ECF No. 13); Order entered June 15, 2016 (ECF No. 32). Their response to

24

the motion for stay and abeyance was due January 3, 2017. See LR 7-2(b).

25
26

On December 27, 2016, respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 52),
requesting an extension to January 26, 2017, of the time to file their reply in support of their motion

1

to dismiss. On January 3, 2017, respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 54),

2

requesting an extension to January 18, 2017, to file their responses to Smith’s motion for leave to

3

conduct discovery, motion for evidentiary hearing, and motion for stay. Respondents’ counsel states

4

that the extensions of time are necessary because of her obligations in other cases and because of

5

time away from her office during the holidays. The court finds that the motions for extension of time

6

were made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause to

7

extend these deadlines.

8

The court will grant the motions for extension of time, and extend all respondents’ deadlines

9

-- for their reply in support of their motion to dismiss, and their responses to the motion for leave to

10

conduct discovery, the motion for evidentiary hearing, and the motion for stay and abeyance -- to

11

January 26, 2017.

12

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondents’ motions for extensions of time (ECF

13

Nos. 52, 54) are GRANTED. Respondents shall have until and including January 26, 2017, to file

14

their reply in support of their motion to dismiss, and their responses to the motion for leave to

15

conduct discovery, the motion for evidentiary hearing, and the motion for stay and abeyance.

16

Petitioner will then have 20 days to file replies in support of his motion for leave to conduct

17

discovery, motion for evidentiary hearing, and motion for stay and abeyance. The court will not

18

further extend this briefing schedule, for any party, absent extraordinary circumstances.

19
20

10
January
Dated this _____ day of ________________________, 2017.
2016.

21
22
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
23
24
25
26

2