Davis v. Neven et al
Filing
66
ORDER Granting Respondents' 65 First Unopposed Motion to Extend Time Re: 62 Motion for Evidentiary Hearing. Responses due by 12/3/2018. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 10/23/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ADAM PAUL LAXALT
Attorney General
Heidi Parry Stern (Bar. No. 8873)
Chief Deputy Attorney General
State of Nevada
Office of the Attorney General
555 E. Washington Ave., #3900
Las Vegas, NV 89101-1068
(702) 486-3594
HStern@ag.nv.gov
Attorneys for Respondents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
JAMES ANTHONY DAVIS,
11
Petitioner,
12
vs.
13
DWIGHT W. NEVEN, et al.,
14
Case No. 2:15-cv-01574-RFB-NJK
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION TO
PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR
EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ECF NO. 62)
(FIRST REQUEST)
Respondents.
15
16
Respondents hereby request an extension of time of an additional forty-five (45) days, up to and
17
including December 3, 2018, within which to file their Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion for Evidentiary
18
Hearing (ECF No. 62). The current due date to file the Opposition is October 19, 2018.
19
This motion is based on the accompanying Declaration of Counsel.
20
DATED: October 19, 2018.
21
22
23
24
ADAM PAUL LAXALT
Attorney General
By: /s/ Heidi Parry Stern
Heidi Parry Stern (Bar. No. 8873)
Chief Deputy Attorney General
25
26
27
28
Page 1 of 3
DECLARATION OF HEIDI PARRY STERN
1
2
3
STATE OF NEVADA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF CLARK )
4
I, HEIDI PARRY STERN, being first duly sworn under oath, depose and state as follows:
5
1.
I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Nevada; qualified and admitted to
6
practice before this Court; employed as a Chief Deputy Attorney General in the Office of the Nevada
7
Attorney General; and pursuant to this employment, I have been assigned to represent Respondents in
8
James Anthony Davis v. Dwight W. Neven, et al., 2:15-cv-01574-RFB-NJK, and as such, have personal
9
knowledge of the matters contained herein.
2.
10
This extension is necessary due to my preparation for oral argument in the Ninth Circuit
11
in Robert Jones v. Jack Palmer, et al., Case No. 17-15575, which took place on October 9, 2018, and
12
Alquandre H. Turner v. Renee Baker, Warden, et al., Case No. 17-72044, which will be taking place on
13
November 16, 2018.
3.
14
15
In addition, our office has been short staffed over the past few months due to the retirement
of one of the attorneys in our unit and the difficulty in finding a replacement for him.
16
4.
17
October 19, 2018.
18
5.
Respondents request forty-five (45) days to file a reply, up to and including December 3,
20
6.
I have contacted opposing counsel, and she has no objection to this request for extension.
21
7.
This is Respondents’ first motion for enlargement of time to file the Opposition.
22
8.
This motion for enlargement of time is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay.
23
DATED this 19th day of October, 2018.
19
24
25
That the Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion for Evidentiary Hearing is due to be filed
2018.
APPROVED:
DATED this 23rd day of October, 2018.
__/s/ Heidi Parry Stern____________________
Heidi Parry Stern (Bar No. 8873)
Chief Deputy Attorney General
26
27
28
__________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States District Judge
Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1
2
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time
3
to File Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion for Evidentiary Hearing (ECF No. 62) (First Request) with the
4
Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system on October 19, 2018.
5
6
7
8
9
The following participants in this case are registered CM/ECF users and will be served by the
CM/ECF system:
Amelia L. Bizzaro, Esq.
Federal Public Defender’s Office
411 E. Bonneville Avenue, Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Amelia_bizzaro@fd.org
10
11
/s/ R. Carreau
An employee of the Office of the Attorney General
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 3 of 3
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?