From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reyes v. Hamlet

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 13, 2008
1:04-cv-06571-OWW-TAG (HC) (E.D. Cal. May. 13, 2008)

Opinion

1:04-cv-06571-OWW-TAG (HC).

May 13, 2008


ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE TRAVERSE (Doc. 20)


Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 1, 2008, petitioner filed a motion to extend the time to file a traverse.

A traverse is a reply to an answer or return. Respondents did not file an answer. Respondents filed a motion to dismiss. As provided in the Court's order setting a briefing schedule in this case (Doc. 13), Petitioner's opposition to the motion to dismiss was due 18 days after the motion to dismiss was filed, plus three days for mailing. Respondents' motion to dismiss was filed on February 1, 2008. (Doc. 15). On March 20, 2008, Petitioner filed an untimely motion for a 90-day extension of time to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss. (Doc. 18). Despite the untimeliness of the motion, the Court considered and granted it in part, and extended the time for Petitioner to file an opposition to April 28, 2008. (Doc. 19).

On May 1, 2008, Petitioner filed a second untimely motion for an extension of time, this time requesting an additional 30 days to file a traverse. The Court construes the instant motion as a request for an extension of time to file an opposition to Respondents' motion to dismiss.

In the instant motion, Petitioner argues that he needs an additional 30 days "due to the lack of opportunity to enter into the Law Library due to the Lock-Downs here at Soledad State Prison." The Court finds that good cause exists to grant the instant motion in part, and to deny it in part, and makes the following order:

1. Petitioner's motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to Respondent's motion to dismiss is GRANTED, but only until May 30, 2008 (Doc. 20);

2. Petitioner shall have to and including May 30, 2008 to file an opposition to Respondents' motion to dismiss; and

3. No further extensions of time will be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Reyes v. Hamlet

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 13, 2008
1:04-cv-06571-OWW-TAG (HC) (E.D. Cal. May. 13, 2008)
Case details for

Reyes v. Hamlet

Case Details

Full title:JOE REYES, Petitioner, v. JIM HAMLET, et al, Respondents

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 13, 2008

Citations

1:04-cv-06571-OWW-TAG (HC) (E.D. Cal. May. 13, 2008)