Opinion
2:18-cv-01073-JCM-DJA
01-28-2022
Luis A. Urenda-Bustos, Petitioner, v. Jerry Howell, et al., Respondents.
Rene L. Valladares Federal Public Defender Martin L. Novillo Assistant Federal Public Defender
Rene L. Valladares Federal Public Defender
Martin L. Novillo Assistant Federal Public Defender
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 60)
(SECOND REQUEST)
Petitioner Luis A. Urenda-Bustos moves for an extension of time of thirty (30) days, up to and including February 23, 2022, to file his Opposition to Respondents' Motion to Dismiss. Respondents do not oppose this request.
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
1. On July 16, 2021, Mr. Urenda-Bustos filed his Fourth Amended Petition in this case. The filing followed Mr. Urenda-Bustos staying his case and returning to state court to exhaust claims. On December 27, 2021, Respondents filed a Motion to Dismiss. On January 10, 2022, undersigned counsel requested and was granted a fourteen (14) day extension to file his opposition to the motion to dismiss. Counsel underestimated conflicting responsibilities and, as a result and for the reasons detailed below, is now forced to seek an additional thirty (30) day extension, or until February 23, 2022, to file his opposition to Respondents' motion.
ECF No. 19.
See ECF Nos. 44-49.
ECF No. 60.
ECF Nos. 61, 62.
2. Undersigned counsel's duties and responsibilities in other matters, as detailed below, prevented him from meeting the current deadline. Undersigned counsel has a busy caseload involving both non-capital and capital habeas matters currently pending in Nevada and out-of-state district courts for which he is carrying on various investigations and research and writing assignments.
3. Specifically, counsel had to draft a Petition for Rehearing due in the Ninth Circuit on January 27, 2022 in the non-capital habeas matter Sempier v. Baker et al., Case No. 20-17249 (D. Nev.). In addition, counsel had to draft an opposition to a motion to dismiss filed on January 18, 2022 in the non-capital habeas matter of Bautista v. Garrett et al., 20-cv-00403-LRH (D. Nev.). Finally, counsel has had to invest a considerable amount of time drafting a reply or traverse due in February of 2022 in the capital habeas case Hernandez v. Gittere et al., 09-cv-00545-LRH (D. Nev.).
4. This requested extension will permit counsel time to thoroughly and adequately respond to the arguments raised by the Respondents in their motion. This is Urenda-Bustos' second request for an extension and is not made for the purposes of delay, but rather in the interests of justice.
5. Finally, the present request for an extension is unopposed. On January 24, 2022, counsel for Petitioner contacted Deputy Attorney Erica Berrett via email concerning this request for an extension of time. Ms. Berrett has no objection to the request.
WHEREFORE, counsel respectfully requests that this Court grant the request for an extension of time to file an opposition to Respondents' motion to dismiss to February 23, 2022.
It is so ordered: