Grow v. Dzurenda et al

Filing 19

ORDER that respondents' Motion for Enlargement of Time to file reply to ECF No. 13 Motion to Dismiss. Respondents' reply due by 5/9/2018. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 4/10/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

JOSHUA RYAN GROW,

10
11
12
13

Case No. 3:17-cv-00637-MMD-WGC
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.
JAMES DZURENDA, et al.,
Respondents.

14
15

In this habeas corpus action, the respondents filed a motion to dismiss on

16

February 2, 2018 (ECF No. 13). The pro se petitioner, Joshua Ryan Grow, filed an

17

opposition to the motion to dismiss on April 2, 2018 (ECF No. 17).

18

The order entered December 4, 2017 (ECF No. 6), contains scheduling

19

provisions relative to this case. That order states: “If respondents file a motion to

20

dismiss, petitioner will have sixty (60) days to file a response to the motion to dismiss,

21

and then respondents will have thirty (30) days to file a reply to petitioner’s response.”

22

Order entered December 4, 2017 (ECF No. 6), p. 2. Therefore, respondents’ reply to

23

Grow’s opposition to the motion to dismiss is due on May 2, 2018.

24

On April 9, 2018, respondents filed a motion for an extension of time (ECF No.

25

18), requesting an extension of time to May 9, 2018, for their reply in support of their

26

motion to dismiss. Respondents mistakenly characterize this as a 30-day extension of

27

time; it would be a 7-day extension. This would be the first extension of this deadline.

28

Respondents’ counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of her

1

obligations in other cases. The Court finds that respondents’ motion for extension of

2

time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good

3

cause for the extension of time requested.
The Court will grant this motion for extension of time. However, the Court will not

4
5

look favorably upon any motion to further extend this deadline.

6

It is therefore ordered that respondents’ Motion for Enlargement of Time (ECF

7

No. 18) is granted. Respondents will have until May 9, 2018, to file a reply to petitioner’s

8

opposition to their motion to dismiss. In all other respects, the schedule for further

9

proceedings set forth in the order entered December 4, 2017 (ECF No. 6) will remain in

10
11

effect.
DATED THIS 10th day of April 2018.

12
13
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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