Reyes v. Superintendent LaManna
- Ona Wang
- 1:18-cv-08724
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Reyes v. Superintendent LaManna, Judge Wang partly granted Reyes’s deadline-extension request and set December 20, 2019 deadlines.
Petitioner Roderick Reyes, who was given a December 20, 2019 deadline to choose how to proceed with potentially unexhausted claims and to file a reply, and Respondent Superintendent LaManna.
What happened
Reyes v. Superintendent LaManna concerns Petitioner Roderick Reyes’s request for more time to file a reply brief. The court had previously given Reyes two choices concerning potentially unexhausted claims: abandon those claims and continue with the exhausted claims, or proceed with all claims while risking dismissal of the entire petition.
The court required Reyes to tell it which option he chose by December 20, 2019. It also required him to file his reply by that date, although he could request more time to file the reply if he showed a good reason.
Judge Ona T. Wang granted Reyes’s request to extend the reply deadline in part and stated that no further extensions would be allowed for informing the court of his choice. The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Reyes a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- Reyes v. Superintendent LaManna · No. 1:18-cv-08724
- Ona Wang
- Nov. 22, 2019
Background
Petitioner Roderick Reyes asked for an extension of the deadline to file his reply brief. The court’s order refers to Reyes’s petition and to potentially unexhausted claims, meaning claims for which the required prior review may not have been completed.
Earlier Order and Available Choices
The court said its October 23, 2019 order had given Reyes two options under Rhines v. Weber: (1) abandon any potentially unexhausted claims and proceed only with the remaining exhausted claims, or (2) proceed with all claims while risking dismissal of the entire petition if the court later found that the claims had not been properly exhausted.
Reyes was required to notify the court of his choice by December 20, 2019. The court stated that no further extensions would be granted for that deadline. Reyes also had to file a reply to his petition by December 20, 2019, but could request additional time for the reply if he showed good cause, meaning a sufficient reason.
Ruling
Judge Ona T. Wang granted Reyes’s request to extend the reply-brief deadline in part. The order does not specify which portion of the request was granted or what portion was not. The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Reyes a copy of the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.