From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Young v. Hickman

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 11, 2008
1:06-cv-00042 LJO TAG (HC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2008)

Summary

involving 95-day delay

Summary of this case from Sierra v. Martinez

Opinion

1:06-cv-00042 LJO TAG (HC).

March 11, 2008


ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME


On March 3, 2008, Petitioner filed a motion for a 30-day extension of time (Doc. 18) to file objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations. The objections were due by March 3, 2008. The Court has considered Petitioner's motion, finds that good cause exists to grant it, and makes the following order:

1. Petitioner's motion for an extension of time to file objections is GRANTED (Doc. 18);

2. Petitioner shall have to and including April 3, 2008, to file his objections to the Findings and Recommendations; and

3. This order is made nunc pro tunc to March 3, 2008.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Young v. Hickman

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 11, 2008
1:06-cv-00042 LJO TAG (HC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2008)

involving 95-day delay

Summary of this case from Sierra v. Martinez

involving 95-day delay

Summary of this case from Matthews v. Lewis
Case details for

Young v. Hickman

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER HENRY YOUNG, Petitioner, v. RODERICK HICKMAN, et al.…

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

Date published: Mar 11, 2008

Citations

1:06-cv-00042 LJO TAG (HC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2008)

Citing Cases

Sierra v. Martinez

Numerous judges who have considered this issue also agree that a delay of more than 60 days is unreasonable.…

Matthews v. Lewis

Numerous judges who have considered this issue agree that a delay far shorter than the delay involved here is…