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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEVADA 

* * * 

BRIAN KERRY O’KEEFE,

Petitioner,

v.

ROBERT LEGRAND, et al.,

Respondents.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00430-MMD-VPC

ORDER

 The Court dismissed this action because petitioner had neither filed an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis nor paid the filing fee. (ECF No. 3.) Petitioner 

has filed a motion for relief (ECF No. 5), in which he shows that he had submitted a 

request to prison officials to pay the fee around the same time that he mailed his 

habeas corpus petition to the Court. The Court received that payment the day after 

petitioner filed his motion for relief. The Court grants petitioner’s motion and reinstates 

the action. 

 Petitioner is a prisoner in the custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections. 

He is challenging the validity of a detainer placed by the State of Ohio. The Court will 

serve upon respondents for a response, but it is possible that a more suitable forum 

would be a federal district court in Ohio. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 

U.S. 484, 499 n.15 (1973) 

 It is therefore ordered that petitioner’s motion for relief (ECF No. 5) is granted. 

The Clerk of the Court is directed to reopen this action. 

Case: 2:17-cv-00845-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 10 Filed: 10/13/16 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 28
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

 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court file the petition for a writ of habeas 

corpus. 

 It is further ordered that the Clerk add Adam Paul Laxalt, Attorney General for the 

State of Nevada, as counsel for respondents. 

 It is further ordered that the Clerk electronically serve upon respondents a copy 

of the petition and this order. In addition, the Clerk will return to petitioner a copy of the 

petition. 

 It is further ordered that respondents will have forty-five (45) days from the date 

on which the petition was served to answer or otherwise respond to the petition. 

Respondents must raise all potential affirmative defenses in the initial responsive 

pleading, including untimeliness, lack of exhaustion, and procedural default. Successive 

motions to dismiss will not be entertained. If respondents file and serve an answer, then 

they must comply with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United 

States District Courts, and then petitioner will have forty-five (45) days from the date on 

which the answer is served to file a reply. If respondents file a motion, then the briefing 

schedule of Local Rule LR 7-2 shall apply. 

 It is further ordered that any exhibits filed by the parties must be filed with a 

separate index of exhibits identifying the exhibits by number or letter. The CM/ECF 

attachments that are filed further must be identified by the number or numbers (or letter 

or letters) of the exhibits in the attachment. The hard copy of any additional state court 

record exhibits must be forwarded — for this case — to the staff attorneys in Las Vegas. 

 It is further ordered that, henceforth, petitioner must serve upon respondents or, 

if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon the attorney(s), a copy of every 

pleading, motion or other document submitted for consideration by the court. Petitioner 

must include with the original paper submitted for filing a certificate stating the date that 

a true and correct copy of the document was mailed to the respondents or counsel for 

the respondents. The Court may disregard any paper received by a district judge or 

///

Case: 2:17-cv-00845-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 10 Filed: 10/13/16 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 29
3 

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

magistrate judge that has not been filed with the Clerk, and any paper received by a 

district judge, magistrate judge, or the Clerk that fails to include a certificate of service. 

 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court send a copy of this order to the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Case No. 16-16546. 

DATED THIS 13th day of October 2016. 

 

 MIRANDA M. DU 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case: 2:17-cv-00845-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 10 Filed: 10/13/16 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 30