Hicks v. Baker et al

Filing 21

ORDER granting 19 Motion to Extend Time to File Response to 15 Motion to Dismiss (responses due by 2/3/2016) and denying 20 Motion for District Judge to Reconsider Order. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 12/8/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

BRANDON M. HICKS,

8
9
10

Case No. 3:15-cv-00215-MMD-WGC
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.
RENEE BAKER, et al.,
Respondents.

11
12

Petitioner has filed a belated motion for enlargement of time. (Dkt. no. 19.)

13

Petitioner does not explain why he did not file this request before the expiration of the

14

time to file and serve a response, which, as the Court explained in its order of October

15

20, 2015, is governed by LR 7-2. Nonetheless, the Court will give petitioner additional

16

time to file a response.

17

Petitioner has filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s denial of

18

petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel. (Dkt. no. 20.) Nothing in the motion

19

would cause the Court to depart from its earlier ruling.

20

It is therefore ordered that petitioner’s motion for enlargement of time (dkt. no.

21

19) is granted. Petitioner will have through February 3, 2016, to file and serve a

22

response to respondents’ motion to dismiss (dkt. no. 15).

23
24
25

It is further ordered that petitioner’s motion for reconsideration (dkt. no. 20) is
denied.
DATED THIS 8th day of December 2015.

26
27
28

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE