Opinion
3:20-cv-00488-RCJ-CSD
04-29-2022
MARIO CAMACHO, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM REUBART, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
ROBERT C. JONES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
In this habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Mario Camacho, represented by appointed counsel, filed a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus on January 11, 2022 (ECF No. 35). After a 60-day initial period and a 45-day extension of time, Respondents were due to respond to the second amended petition by April 28, 2022. See Order entered January 8, 2021 (ECF No. 22) (60 days for response); Order entered March 25, 2022 (ECF No. 39) (30-day extension).
On April 28, 2022, Respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 40), requesting a further 33-day extension of time, to May 31, 2022. Respondents' counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because of personal medical/health issues (as was the first extension). Petitioner does not oppose the motion for extension of time. The Court finds that the motion for extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good cause for the extension of time.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents' Motion for Enlargement of Time (ECF No. 40) is GRANTED. Respondent will have until and including May 31, 2022, to file a response to Petitioner's second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered January 8, 2021 (ECF No. 22) will remain in effect.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), William Reubart is substituted for William Gittere as the respondent warden. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect this change.