Reberger v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 84

ORDER that petitioner's motion to voluntarily dismiss his motions to dismiss counsel (ECF No. 82 ) is granted; petitioner's pro se motions to dismiss his counsel (ECF Nos. 71 and 74 ) and pro se motions for extension of time (E CF Nos. 70 and 77 ) are all withdrawn; petitioner's five counseled motions for extension of time to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 67 , 68 , 69 , 76 , and 78 ) are all granted nunc pro tunc; petitioner's counsels two motions for extension of time to respond to motion to compel (ECF Nos. 75 and 79 ) are both granted nunc pro tunc; petitioner's motion for leave to file (ECF No. 81 ) is granted; respondent s' motion for extension of time to file a reply in support of the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 83 ) is granted; respondents' reply to ECF No. 66 Motion to Dismiss due by 3/1/2018. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 2/13/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 LANCE REBERGER, 10 Case No. 3:13-cv-00071-MMD-VPC Petitioner, ORDER v. 11 STATE OF NEVADA, et al., 12 Respondents. 13 14 15 This counseled petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 16 is before the Court on several motions for extension of time, which, good cause 17 appearing, will be granted. Also before the Court are petitioner Lance Reberger’s two pro 18 se motions to dismiss the Federal Public Defender as his counsel (ECF Nos. 71, 74). 19 However, Reberger has now filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss his motions to dismiss 20 the FPD (ECF No. 82). He indicates that he and his counsel have resolved their conflicts. 21 Accordingly, it is ordered that petitioner’s motion to voluntarily dismiss his motions 22 to dismiss counsel (ECF No. 82) is granted. 23 It is further ordered that petitioner’s two pro se motions to dismiss his counsel (ECF 24 Nos. 71 and 74) and his two pro se motion for extension of time to file a pro se opposition 25 (ECF Nos. 70 and 77) are all withdrawn. 26 It is further ordered that the petitioner’s five counseled motions for extension of 27 time to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 67, 68, 69, 76, and 78) are 28 all granted nunc pro tunc. 1 2 3 4 It is further ordered that petitioner’s counsel’s two motions for extension of time to respond to motion to compel (ECF Nos. 75 and 79) are both granted nunc pro tunc. It is further ordered that petitioner’s motion for leave to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss that exceeds the page limit (ECF No. 81) is granted. 5 It is further ordered that respondents’ motion for extension of time to file a reply in 6 support of the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 83) is granted. Respondents will file their reply 7 on or before March 1, 2018. 8 DATED THIS 13th day of February 2018. 9 10 11 MIRANDA M. DU 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?