Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00749/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00749-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Darral G. Adams
Respondent
Walter H. White
Petitioner

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 A reply to an answer is a traverse. A traverse is not a mandatory pleading. 

1

-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WALTER H. WHITE,

Petitioner,

vs.

DARRAL G. ADAMS, Warden,

Respondent. 

________________________________/

1:07-cv-0749 OWW TAG (HC)

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO

FILE TRAVERSE

(Doc. 21)

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE 

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a habeas corpus action pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 25, 2008, petitioner filed a motion to extend the time to file a

reply to respondent’s answer. (Doc. 21). This is Petitioner’s second request for an extension of 1

time to file a traverse. (Docs. 19, 21). Petitioner’s motion asserts two grounds for a further

extension of time. First, he suffered “recent work-related injuries.” Second, there have been

“continuous facility lock downs” at the prison where he is incarcerated, causing him to have

less access to the prison library. (Doc. 21, p. 2). 

As to Plaintiff’s first ground, he does not explain what injuries he suffered, when he

suffered them, or precisely how they affect his ability to file a traverse. As to Plaintiff’s second

ground, prison lockdowns and restricted library access are not unusual. While the Court is not

entirely persuaded that Petitioner has established good cause for a continuance, it will grant him

one last extension of time to file a traverse.

Case 1:07-cv-00749-WQH -WMC Document 22 Filed 09/15/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-2-

Accordingly, the Court makes the following orders: 

1. Petitioner is granted thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order in which to

file a traverse; and 

2. No further extensions of time to file a traverse will be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 12, 2008 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:07-cv-00749-WQH -WMC Document 22 Filed 09/15/08 Page 2 of 2