From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Byford v. Baker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Sep 26, 2012
3:11-cv-00112-ECR-WGC (D. Nev. Sep. 26, 2012)

Opinion

3:11-cv-00112-ECR-WGC

09-26-2012

ROBERT ROYCE BYFORD, Petitioner, v. RENEE BAKER, et al., Respondents.


ORDER

On May 18, 2012, petitioner filed a motion for leave to file a second amended petition. ECF No. 27. Respondents filed a response indicating that they did not object to the filing of the pleading, with the one condition that petitioner provide a statement of exhaustion as required by LSR 3-1 and Rule 2 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the Federal District Courts. ECF No. 38.

Petitioner has filed a second amended petition that contains a statement of exhaustion with respect to the claims contained therein. ECF No. 46.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's motion for leave to file a second amended petition (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED nunc pro tunc as of September 4, 2012.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall file their response to petitioner's motion for stay and abeyance (ECF No. 31) within thirty-five (35) days of the date this order is entered.

______________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Byford v. Baker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Sep 26, 2012
3:11-cv-00112-ECR-WGC (D. Nev. Sep. 26, 2012)
Case details for

Byford v. Baker

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT ROYCE BYFORD, Petitioner, v. RENEE BAKER, et al., Respondents.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Sep 26, 2012

Citations

3:11-cv-00112-ECR-WGC (D. Nev. Sep. 26, 2012)