Opinion
3:15-cv-00476-MMD-CLB
08-23-2023
Joel Cardenas, Petitioner, v. Dwight Neven, et al., Respondents.
Rene L. Valladares, Federal Public Defender. Laura Barrera, Assistant Federal Public Defender.
Rene L. Valladares, Federal Public Defender.
Laura Barrera, Assistant Federal Public Defender.
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY
Petitioner Joel Cardenas, by and through counsel, Laura Barrera, Assistant Federal Public Defender, moves this Court for an extension of time of 62 days from August 22, 2023, to and including October 23, 2023, to file the reply to answer to the amended petition.
Argument
Petitioner Joel Cardenas filed a first amended petition on March 22, 2019. On July 22, 2019, Respondents moved to dismiss that petition. Petitioner opposed the motion to dismiss on November 18, 2019. On February 13, 2020, this Court granted the motion to dismiss in part, dismissing Ground 6, and denied it in part. In the same order, this Court sua sponte stayed the case in federal court to allow Cardenas to exhaust state court remedies as to grounds 2 and 3.
ECF No. 39.
ECF No. 43.
ECF No. 53.
ECF No. 56.
The case was reopened on April 21, 2022. Respondents filed a renewed motion to dismiss on August 8, 2022. Cardenas filed an opposition on August 9, 2022. This Court denied the renewed motion to dismiss on December 22, 2022, deferring ruling on whether Cardenas can overcome the procedural default of Grounds 2 and 3 until full merits review. This Court also ordered Respondents to file an answer on the merits to all of Cardenas's claims apart from Ground 6, which was previously dismissed. Respondents filed their answer on April 24, 2023. The reply to the answer is currently due on August 22, 2023. Cardenas respectfully requests an additional 62 days to file the reply. The additional period of time is necessary in order to effectively represent Cardenas. This motion is filed in the interests of justice and not for the purposes of unnecessary delay. This is Cardenas's second request to extend this deadline.
ECF No. 60.
ECF No. 63.
ECF No. 68.
ECF No. 72 at 4-6.
ECF No. 72 at 6.
ECF No. 78.
ECF No. 80.
The extension is needed due to undersigned counsel's additional case-related obligations since the previous request for an extension was filed, including filing an opposition in Santiago v. Johnson, 2:21-cv-00896-APG-NJK on May 25, 2023; a request for a certificate of appealability in Aberha v. Gittere, 23-15267 on May 30, 2023; an amended petition in Durr v. Warden, 2:22-cv-00732-JAD-NJK on June 27, 2023; a Ninth Circuit Oral Argument in San Francisco on July 19, 2023 in Harsh v. Lawson, 21-16719; and filing an amended petition in Langford v. Baker, 3:19-cv-00594-MMD-CSD on July 26, 2023. Additionally, counsel has had case-related travel to the Reno area.
On August 22, 2023, Deputy Attorney General Michael Bongard stated via email that he did not object to the extension, but the lack of objection should not be construed as a waiver of any procedural defenses.
For the above stated reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests this Court grant an extension of time of 62 days and order the reply to the answer to the amended petition to be filed on or before October 23, 2023.
IT IS SO ORDERED: