Thomas v. Filson et al

Filing 22

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 10 petitioner's Motion to Partially Waive Local Rule IA 10-3(e) is DENIED as unnecessary and moot. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 8/8/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 *** 7 MARLO THOMAS, 8 Petitioner, 9 10 Case No. 2:17-cv-00475-RFB-VCF ORDER v. TIMOTHY FILSON, et al., 11 Respondents. 12 13 14 In this capital habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Marlo Thomas, filed an amended habeas petition (ECF No. 11), along with several exhibits (ECF Nos. 12-21), on August 1, 2017. 15 Thomas also filed a Motion to Partially Waive Local Rule IA 10-3(e) (ECF No. 10). In 16 that motion, Thomas requests a waiver of the Court’s local rule that generally requires, with respect 17 to filed exhibits, that the exhibits’ cover sheets contain descriptions of the exhibits. See LR 10- 18 3(e).The Court’s local rules were recently amended, with the amendments effective August 1, 19 2017. Among the amendments is a new rule, LSR 3-3(b), which states, with regard to exhibits 20 filed in habeas corpus cases: “The cover sheet for each exhibit need only reference the number or 21 letter of the exhibit; the cover sheet need not include a descriptor of the exhibit.” Therefore, LR 22 IA 10-3(e) no longer applies in habeas corpus cases. Thomas’ motion is unnecessary and moot, 23 and it will be denied on those grounds. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 28 1 2 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner=s Motion to Partially Waive Local Rule IA 10-3(e) (ECF No. 10) is DENIED as unnecessary and moot. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DATED this 8th day of August, 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?