From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yaag v. Garrett

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 7, 2022
3:14-cv-00295-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Dec. 7, 2022)

Opinion

3:14-cv-00295-MMD-WGC

12-07-2022

DONALD STEPHEN YAAG, Petitioner, v. TIM GARRETT,[1] et al., Respondents.


ORDER

MIRANDA M. DU, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Respondents filed a motion (first request) for enlargement of time to respond to Petitioner Donald Stephen Yaag's motion for, inter alia, Rule 60(b)(6) review (ECF No. 95 (“Motion”)). Yaag did not file an opposition to the request. The Court finds that the request is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay. Thus, good cause exists to grant the Motion.

It is therefore ordered that Respondents' motion for enlargement of time (ECF No. 95) is granted. Respondents have until January 30, 2023, to respond to Yaag's motion (ECF No. 94).

The Clerk of Court is directed to substitute Tim Garrett for Respondent Renee Baker.


Summaries of

Yaag v. Garrett

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 7, 2022
3:14-cv-00295-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Dec. 7, 2022)
Case details for

Yaag v. Garrett

Case Details

Full title:DONALD STEPHEN YAAG, Petitioner, v. TIM GARRETT,[1] et al., Respondents.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Dec 7, 2022

Citations

3:14-cv-00295-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Dec. 7, 2022)