Munoz v. Smith et al
ORDER - Answer/Response to ECF NO. 89 Second Amended Petition due by 1/18/2018. If answer filed then reply due 45 days from service of answer. If respondents file a motion, then the briefing schedule of Local Rule LR 7-2 shall apply. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 12/4/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
PETER J. MUNOZ, JR.,
Case No. 3:11-cv-00197-LRH-RAM
GREGORY SMITH, WARDEN, et al.,
Petitioner has filed a second amended petition (ECF No. 89). The court has reviewed it
pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.
The court will direct respondents to file a response.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondents shall have forty-five (45) days from the
date of entry of this order to answer or otherwise respond to the second amended petition (ECF No.
89). If respondents file and serve an answer, then they shall comply with Rule 5 of the Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, and then petitioner shall have
forty-five (45) days from the date on which the answer is served to file a reply. If respondents file a
motion, then the briefing schedule of Local Rule LR 7-2 shall apply.
DATED this 4th day of December, 2017.
LARRY R. HICKS
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?