Skjold v. Glebe

Filing 24

ORDER Granting Plaintiff Additional Extension of Time to Respond; re Plaintiff's 23 Letter, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Shane Skjold, Prisoner ID: 748218)(SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 SHANE SKJOLD, Plaintiff, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Case No. C16-1349RSL v. PAT GLEBE, Defendant. This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff Shane Skjold’s letter to the Court inquiring as to the status of his case. Dkt. # 23. On February 17, 2017, plaintiff requested an extension of time to file a reply to defendant’s response to his habeas petition. Dkt. # 20. On March 13, 2017, Magistrate Judge Theiler granted plaintiff an extension until March 31, 2017. Dkt. # 21. Plaintiff did not file a reply by that date, and on May 17, 2017, Magistrate Judge Theiler issued a report and recommendation on plaintiff’s petition. Dkt. # 22. Though plaintiff is registered as an electronic filer through the CM/ECF docket system, and thus should have received Magistrate Judge Theiler’s order granting plaintiff’s motion for an extension, it appears that plaintiff was not notified of that order. Dkt. # 23. Plaintiff’s objections, if any, to Magistrate Judge Theiler’s report and recommendation are due by June 7, 2017. If plaintiff still wishes to file a reply to the government’s response in addition to any objections that he may file regarding Magistrate Judge Theiler’s report and recommendation, plaintiff may file that reply by May 31, 2017. 27 28 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF ADDITIONAL EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF ADDITIONAL TIME TO RESPOND - 1 1 2 DATED this 19th day of May, 2017. 3 A 4 Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF ADDITIONAL TIME TO RESPOND - 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?