Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jackson v. Curry

August 24, 2010

ALEX JACKSON, PETITIONER,
v.
BEN CURRY, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF

Before the Court is respondent's Request for Nunc Pro Tunc Extension of Time, filed August 5, 2010, by which respondent seeks leave to file a supplemental brief regarding the significance of Hayward v. Marshall, 603 F.3d 546 (9th Cir. 2010), with respect to the instant action. As respondent concedes, the supplemental brief is not timely under the Court's June 16, 2010 Order. Although respondent's counsel seeks to explain such delay by stating that she "did not receive a copy" and "only became aware of the Order . . . when [she] received Petitioner's responding brief" (see Declaration ¶ 4), the Court notes that all parties were served with said order by electronic filing on June 16, 2010. Nevertheless, because the Court remains interested in hearing from both parties, the Court will allow the late filing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100824

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.