Hobson v. Howell et al
Filing
63
ORDER Granting 62 Motion to Extend Time. Attorney General of the State of Nevada Answer due 3/17/2025; Ronald Oliver Answer due 3/17/2025. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 3/4/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JG)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
4
TONY HOBSON,
5
Petitioner,
6
v.
7
RONALD OLIVER, et al.,
8
Respondents.
Case No. 2:20-cv-00503-KJD-NJK
ORDER
9
10
11
In this habeas corpus action, after a 90-day initial period and a 56-day
12
extension, the respondents were due to file a response to Petitioner Tony Hobson’s
13
fourth amended habeas petition by March 3, 2025. See ECF Nos. 57, 61. On
14
March 3, Respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 62), requesting a
15
further 14-day extension, to March 17, 2025. Respondents’ counsel states that the
16
extension of time is necessary because of their obligations in other cases.
17
Respondents’ counsel represents that Hobson, who is represented by appointed
18
counsel, does not oppose the motion for extension of time. The Court finds that the
19
motion for extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of
20
delay, and there is good cause for the extension of time.
21
///
22
///
23
///
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
1
1
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents’ Motion for Enlargement
2
of Time (ECF No. 62) is GRANTED. Respondents will have until and including
3
March 17, 2025, to file an answer or other response to the Petitioner’s fourth amended
4
petition for writ of habeas corpus. In all other respects, the schedule for further
5
proceedings set forth in the order entered September 3, 2024 (ECF No. 55) will remain
6
in effect.
7
8
DATED THIS 4th day of March, 2025.
9
10
KENT J. DAWSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?