Opinion
3:17-cv-00515-HDM-CLB
04-04-2023
MARCO GUZMAN, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM GITTERE, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
HOWARD D. MCKIBBEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
In this habeas corpus action, after a 60-day period following the filing of Respondents' answer, and then a 62-day extension of time, Petitioner Marco Guzman, who is represented by appointed counsel, was due to file a reply to the answer by April 3, 2023. See Order entered January 19, 2021 (ECF No. 54) (scheduling order); Order entered February 1, 2023 (ECF No. 87) (62-day extension of time).
On April 3, 2023, Guzman filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 88), requesting a further 30-day extension of time, to May 3, 2023, for his reply. Guzman's counsel states that the extension of time is necessary because this case is relatively complex and because of his obligations in other cases. Guzman's counsel represents that Respondents do 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 requested extension of time.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Extension of Time (ECF No. 88) is GRANTED. Petitioner will have until and including May 3, 2023, to file his reply to Respondents' answer. In all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered January 19, 2021 (ECF No. 54) will remain in effect.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), William Gittere is substituted for Calvin Johnson as the respondent warden. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect this change.