Guzman v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 91

ORDER GRANTING ECF No. 90 Motion to Extend Time: Petitioner will have until and including June 5, 2023, to file his reply to Respondents answer. The Court will not look favorably upon any motion to further extend this deadline. In all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered January 19, 2021 (ECF No. 54 ) will remain in effect. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 5/5/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DLS)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4

MARCO GUZMAN,

5

Petitioner,

6

v.

7

WILLIAM GITTERE, et al.,

8

Respondents.

Case No. 3:17-cv-00515-HDM-CLB
ORDER

9
10

In this habeas corpus action, after a 60-day period following the filing of

11

Respondents’ answer, a 62-day extension of time, and a 30-day extension of time,

12

Petitioner Marco Guzman, who is represented by appointed counsel, was due to file a

13

reply to the answer by May 3, 2023. See Order entered January 19, 2021 (ECF No. 54)

14

(scheduling order); Order entered February 1, 2023 (ECF No. 87) (62-day extension);

15

Order entered April 4, 2023 (ECF No. 89) (30-day extension).

16

On May 3, 2023, Guzman filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 90),

17

requesting a further 33-day extension of time, to June 5, 2023, for his reply. Guzman’s

18

counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of the relative

19

complexity of this case and because of his obligations in other cases. Guzman’s

20

counsel represents that Respondents do not oppose the motion for extension of time.

21

The Court finds that the motion for extension of time is made in good faith and

22

not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause for the requested

23

extension of time.

24

However, this will now have been six months for Guzman to file his reply. Even

25

given the relative complexity of this case, and counsel’s reportedly heavy caseload, that

26

is enough time for this reply. The Court will not look favorably upon any motion to further

27

extend this deadline.

28
1

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Extension of Time

1
2

(ECF No. 90) is GRANTED. Petitioner will have until and including June 5, 2023, to file

3

his reply to Respondents’ answer. In all other respects, the schedule for further

4

proceedings set forth in the order entered January 19, 2021 (ECF No. 54) will remain in

5

effect.

6
7

DATED THIS 5th day of May, 2023.

8
9
10

HOWARD D. MCKIBBEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2