McConnell vs E. K. McDaniel, et al

Filing 110

ORDER - Petitioner's Motion to Stay Scheduling Order (ECF No. 108 ) is granted. Petitioner will not be required to respond to the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 105 ) until the motion to strike or for more definite statement (ECF No. 107 ) is resolved. The Court will set a schedule for Petitioner's response to the motion to dismiss, if necessary, when the motion to strike or for more definite statement is resolved. Respondents shall respond to the Motion to Strike, or, in the Al ternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (ECF No. 107 ) on or before January 15, 2021. Petitioner will then have 10 days to reply. The Court will not look favorably upon any motion to extend this briefing schedule. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 12/9/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AB)

Case 3:10-cv-00021-GMN-WGC Document 110 Filed 12/09/20 Page 1 of 2

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4
5

ROBERT McCONNELL,

6

Petitioner,

7

Case No. 3:10-cv-00021-GMN-WGC

v.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION
TO STAY SCHEDULING ORDER
(ECF NO. 108)

8
9
10

WILLIAM GITTERE, et al.,
Respondents.

11
12

In this capital habeas corpus action, on April 3, 2020, the petitioner, Robert

13

McConnell, represented by appointed counsel, filed a second amended petition for writ

14

of habeas corpus (ECF No. 95). On October 8, 2020, Respondents filed a motion to

15

dismiss (ECF No. 105). McConnell was due to respond to the motion to dismiss by

16

December 7, 2020. See Order entered December 4, 2019 (ECF No. 91).

17

On December 7, 2020, instead of filing a direct response to the motion to

18

dismiss, McConnell filed a motion to strike the motion to dismiss, or, in the alternative,

19

for a more definite statement of the grounds for the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 107).

20

On that same date, McConnell filed another motion (ECF No. 108), requesting that the

21

Court stay the scheduling order in this case, such that he not be required to respond to

22

the motion to dismiss until the motion to strike or for more definite statement is resolved.

23

The Court has reviewed the motion to dismiss, and the motion to strike or for more

24

definite statement, and the Court determines that there is good cause to stay the

25

briefing of the motion to dismiss, as requested by McConnell. The Court will grant the

26

motion to stay the briefing of the motion to dismiss and will set a firm schedule for the

27

briefing of the motion to strike or for more definite statement The Court will not look

28
1

Case 3:10-cv-00021-GMN-WGC Document 110 Filed 12/09/20 Page 2 of 2

1

favorably upon any motion to extend the schedule for the briefing of the motion to strike

2

or for more definite statement.

3

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Scheduling Order

4

(ECF No. 108) is GRANTED. Petitioner will not be required to respond to the motion to

5

dismiss (ECF No. 105) until the motion to strike or for more definite statement (ECF No.

6

107) is resolved. The Court will set a schedule for Petitioner’s response to the motion to

7

dismiss, if necessary, when the motion to strike or for more definite statement is

8

resolved.

9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall respond to the Motion to

10

Strike, or, in the Alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (ECF No. 107) on or

11

before January 15, 2021. Petitioner will then have 10 days to reply. The Court will not

12

look favorably upon any motion to extend this briefing schedule.

13
14

9
December
DATED THIS ___ day of ______________________, 2020.

15
16
17
18

GLORIA M. NAVARRO,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2