McKay v. Sherry

Full title: ANTOINE McKAY, Petitioner, v. JERI-ANN SHERRY, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Sourthern Division

Date published: Sep 11, 2009

Civil No. 2:08-CV-11046 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 11, 2009)

Opinion

Civil No. 2:08-CV-11046.

September 11, 2009

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE TRAVERSE OR REPLY BRIEF TO THE RESPONDENT'S ANSWER (D/E 24)

STEPHEN MURPHY III, District Judge

Before the Court is Mr. McKay's motion for leave to amend his pleadings, which in actuality, appears to be a request for an extension of time to file an additional reply to the respondent's answer.

The Court will give Mr. McKay sixty days from the date of this order to file a "traverse" or reply brief to the respondent's answer. Rule 5(e) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254 states that a habeas petitioner "may submit a reply to the respondent's answer or other pleading within a time fixed by the judge." See Baysdell v. Howes, No. 04-73293, 2005 WL 1838443, * 4 (E.D. Mich. August 1, 2005).

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's motion for an extension of time (docket no. 24) is GRANTED and Petitioner shall have sixty days from the date of this order to file a traverse or reply brief.