Opinion
Case No. CV415-292
03-28-2016
JARNAED M. WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. WARDEN STANLEY WILLIAMS, Respondent.
ORDER
Unaware of "this Court's unlimited reply brief policy," Linthicum v. Mendakota Ins. Co., 2015 WL 4567106 at * 4 (S.D. Ga. July 28, 2015), Petitioner Jarnard Williams moves for leave to reply to Stanley Williams' response to his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Doc. 17. Given that policy, the motion (doc. 17) is GRANTED. Jarnard Williams has 14 days from the date this Order is served to place his reply in his prison's mail system.
SO ORDERED, this 28th day of March, 2016.
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
See also S.D.Ga.L.R. 7.6 (authorizing reply briefs but imposing notice requirements and time limits); Waddy v. Globus Med., Inc., 2008 WL 3861994 (S.D. Ga. Aug 18, 2008) (the "parties may file as many reply briefs as they like under Local Rule 7.5.") (citing Podger v. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., 212 F.R.D. 609, 609 (S.D. Ga 2003)); Brown v. Chertoff, 2008 WL 5190638 at * 1 (S.D. Ga. Dec.10, 2008) (reminding that "[o]nce the initial round of briefs have been filed, subsequent replies run the risk of 'sudden death.' That is, the Court is free to issue its decision at any time.").