McConnell vs E. K. McDaniel, et al

Filing 134

ORDERED that Respondents' Motion for an Enlargement of Time (ECF Nos. 132 , 133 ) is GRANTED. Respondents will have until and including January 14, 2022, to file their reply in support of their motion to dismiss (ECF No. 122 ), and their response to Petitioner's motion for evidentiary hearing (ECF No. 130 ). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered December 4, 2019 (ECF No. 91 ) will remain in effect. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 11/17/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
Case 3:10-cv-00021-GMN-WGC Document 134 Filed 11/17/21 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. 8 9 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (ECF NOS. 132, 133) WILLIAM GITTERE, et al., Respondents. 10 11 12 In this capital habeas corpus action, the respondents filed a motion to dismiss on 13 May 28, 2021 (ECF No. 122). The petitioner, Robert McConnell, represented by 14 appointed counsel, filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 128) and a 15 motion for evidentiary hearing (ECF No. 130) on October 18, 2021. Respondents were 16 then due to file a reply in support of their motion to dismiss and a response to the 17 motion for evidentiary hearing by November 17, 2021. See Order entered December 4, 18 2019 (ECF No. 91) (allowing 30 days for such filings). 19 On November 16, 2021, Respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF 20 Nos. 132, 133 (ECF Nos. 132 and 133 are identical)), requesting a 58-day extension of 21 time, to January 14, 2022. Respondents’ counsel states that the extension of time is 22 necessary because of the complexity of this matter and because of his obligations in 23 other cases. McConnell does not oppose the motion for extension of time. 24 The Court finds that Respondents’ motion for extension of time is made in good 25 faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause for the 26 requested extension of time. 27 /// 28 /// 1 Case 3:10-cv-00021-GMN-WGC Document 134 Filed 11/17/21 Page 2 of 2 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents’ Motion for an Enlargement of 2 Time (ECF Nos. 132, 133) is GRANTED. Respondents will have until and including 3 January 14, 2022, to file their reply in support of their motion to dismiss and their 4 response to Petitioner’s motion for evidentiary hearing. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further 6 proceedings set forth in the order entered December 4, 2019 (ECF No. 91) will remain 7 in effect. 8 17 November DATED THIS ___ day of ______________________, 2021. 9 10 11 GLORIA M. NAVARRO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?