From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McKnight v. Baker

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 3, 2023
3:17-cv-00681-MMD-CLB (D. Nev. Aug. 3, 2023)

Opinion

3:17-cv-00681-MMD-CLB

08-03-2023

DERRICK LAMAR MCKNIGHT, Petitioner, v. WARDEN BAKER, et al., Respondents.


ORDER

MIRANDA M. DU CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Respondents ask the Court for an extension of 47 days to file a reply in support of their motion to dismiss Derrick Lamar McKnight's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 70.) Petitioner does not oppose. This is Respondents' first request for additional time, and, for good cause, counsel for McKnight was granted lengthy extensions to oppose the motion.

The Court finds that the request is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay. Therefore, good cause exists to grant the motion in part. The Court extends Respondents' deadline to reply to August 31, 2023. The Court is highly unlikely, absent extraordinary circumstances, to grant any further extension.

It is therefore ordered that Respondents' unopposed first motion for extension of time to file a reply in support of their motion to dismiss (ECF No. 70) is granted in part and denied in part. The deadline to file the reply is extended to August 31, 2023.


Summaries of

McKnight v. Baker

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 3, 2023
3:17-cv-00681-MMD-CLB (D. Nev. Aug. 3, 2023)
Case details for

McKnight v. Baker

Case Details

Full title:DERRICK LAMAR MCKNIGHT, Petitioner, v. WARDEN BAKER, et al., Respondents.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Aug 3, 2023

Citations

3:17-cv-00681-MMD-CLB (D. Nev. Aug. 3, 2023)