Morrow v. Williams et al

Filing 37

ORDER that Respondents' three motions for extension of time to file an answer to the petition (ECF Nos. 31 , 32 , 33 ) are all granted nunc pro tunc; Petitioner's motion for copy of answer (ECF No. 35 ) is denied w ithout prejudice as set forth in this order; Petitioner's motion for extension of time to file a reply in support of his petition (ECF No. 36 ) is granted; Petitioner must file and serve his reply on or before September 3, 2019. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/16/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

TROY ANTHONY MORROW,

6

Case No.: 3:17-cv-00580-MMD-CBC
Petitioner,

7
8
9

ORDER
v.
BRIAN E. WILLIAMS, SR., et al.,
Respondents.

10
11
12

Troy Anthony Morrow’s pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus

13 is before the Court on motions by both parties.
14

First, Morrow filed a motion for a copy of Respondents’ answer. (ECF No. 35.) The

15 certificate of service for the answer reflects that Respondents served Morrow by mail
16 within three calendar days of June 27, 2019. (ECF No. 34 at 21.) Morrow’s motion stating
17 that he had not received the answer is dated July 8, 2019. (ECF No. 35 at 2.) It is likely
18 that Morrow did not allow sufficient time for the answer to reach him before filing his
19 motion, and it is likely that he has since received the mailed copy. Thus, the motion is
20 denied without prejudice. If Morrow has not been served with the answer by July 22, he
21 should renew his motion.
22

Both parties also filed motions for extension of time. The Court finds good cause

23 exists to grant these motions.
24

It is therefore ordered that Respondents’ three motions for extension of time to file

24 an answer to the petition (ECF Nos. 31, 32, 33) are all granted nunc pro tunc.
26

It is further ordered that Petitioner’s motion for copy of answer (ECF No. 35) is

27 denied without prejudice as set forth in this order.
28

1

It is further ordered that Petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file a reply in

2 support of his petition (ECF No. 36) is granted. Petitioner must file and serve his reply on
3 or before September 3, 2019.
4

DATED THIS 16th day of July 2019.

5
6
7

_________________________________
MIRANDA M. DU
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2