Nika v. McDaniel et al

Filing 198

ORDER that Petitioner's Motion for Extension of Time (ECF No. 197 ) is DENIED as unnecessary. Petitioner has until and including October 7, 2019, to file a reply in support of his motion to alter or amend the judgment. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/16/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 AVRAM VINETO NIKA, 6 7 Petitioner, v. Case No. 3:09-cv-00178-JCM-WGC ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (ECF NO. 197) 8 WILLIAM GITTERE, et al., 9 Respondents. 10 11 12 In this capital habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Avram Vineto Nika, 13 represented by appointed counsel, filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment 14 (ECF No. 189) on July 9, 2019. Respondents filed an opposition to that motion on 15 September 5, 2019 (ECF No. 196). Nika has until Monday, October 7, 2019, to file his 16 reply in support of the motion. See Order entered July 26, 2019 (ECF No. 193) (30 days 17 for reply); Order entered August 26, 2019 (ECF No. 195) (same). 18 On September 12, 2019, Nika filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 197), 19 requesting an extension of time to September 19, 2019, to file the reply in support of his 20 motion to alter or amend the judgment. But, as Nika already has until October 7, 2019, 21 to file the reply, the motion for extension of time is unnecessary, and it will be denied on 22 that ground. 23 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Extension of Time 2 (ECF No. 197) is DENIED as unnecessary. Petitioner has until and including 3 October 7, 2019, to file a reply in support of his motion to alter or amend the judgment. 4 September 16, 2019. 5 DATED THIS ___ day of ______________________, 2019. 6 7 8 JAMES C. MAHAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 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?