From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farnum v. LeGrand

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Jul 6, 2023
2:13-cv-01304-APG-BNW (D. Nev. Jul. 6, 2023)

Opinion

2:13-cv-01304-APG-BNW

07-06-2023

John Michael Farnum, Petitioner v. Robert LeGrand, et al., Respondents


ORDER

[ECF NO. 94]

Andrew P. Gordon, U.S. District Judge

Respondents, through counsel, move for an additional 45 days to file their response to petitioner's opening brief on remand (ECF No. 91), citing workload and loss of staff as the reasons for needing more time. ECF No. 94. While I am sympathetic to the challenges faced by respondents' counsel, I have already granted her a 62-day extension (ECF No. 93). Thus, I will grant this motion, but will not permit any further extensions under any circumstances.

I THEREFORE ORDER that respondents' motion to extend time to file their response (ECF No. 94) is granted. The response is due August 4, 2023. I will not accept a response from respondents after that date.


Summaries of

Farnum v. LeGrand

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Jul 6, 2023
2:13-cv-01304-APG-BNW (D. Nev. Jul. 6, 2023)
Case details for

Farnum v. LeGrand

Case Details

Full title:John Michael Farnum, Petitioner v. Robert LeGrand, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Jul 6, 2023

Citations

2:13-cv-01304-APG-BNW (D. Nev. Jul. 6, 2023)