Hulsey v. Byrne
Filing
25
ORDER granting Respondents' ECF No. 21 Motion for Waiver of Compliance with LR IA 10-3; granting nunc pro tunc Respondents' ECF No. 11 Motion to Extend Time. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 10/19/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
RONALD HULSEY,
10
Case No. 3:16-cv-00069-RCJ-WGC
Petitioner,
ORDER
v.
11
QUENTIN BYRNE, et al.,
12
Respondents.
13
14
This counseled § 2254 habeas petition is before the court on respondents’
15
motion to partially waive Local Rule IA 10-3(e) and 10-3(i) (ECF No. 21). Respondents
16
ask the court to waive, for purposes of this action, the provision in Local Rule IA 10-3(e)
17
that requires the cover page of each filed exhibit to include a description of the exhibit.
18
See LR IA 10-3(e); see also LR IA 10-3(i). Respondents point out that Local Rule IA 1-
19
4 provides that the court may waive any provision of the local rules, sua sponte or on a
20
motion, if the interests of justice so require. See LR IA 1-4. Respondents state that
21
adding descriptors to the cover pages of exhibits, which in this case now total 112, is
22
unduly burdensome (ECF No. 30). Respondents state that they will still provide indexes
23
of exhibits and exhibit cover sheets referencing each exhibit by letter. Id.
24
25
26
27
28
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
In light of the number of exhibits in this habeas corpus action, the court finds that
there is good cause for the requested waiver, and will grant the waiver for all parties.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondents’ motion to partially waive Local
Rule IA 10-3(e) and 10-3(i) (ECF No. 21) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents’ motion for extension of time to file
a response to the petition (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED nunc pro tunc.
7
8
9
DATED: 19 October 2016.
10
11
ROBERT C. JONES
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?