Sullivan v. Warden of Southern Desert Correctional Center

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 KEITH W. SULLIVAN, 4 Case No. 2:23-cv-01203-JAD-NJK Plaintiff, 5 Order v. 6 [Docket No. 53] WARDEN OF SOUTHERN DESERT CORRECTIONAL CENTER et al., 8 Defendants. 9 Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs motion to extend time.! Docket No. 53. 10 In the instant motion, Plaintiff states, “[i]f indeed a response/reply is due from me I request 11} an extension of time to create and investigate my response/reply. If none such is available and/or 12] necessary by myself please disregard this motion.” Docket No. 53 at 2. To the extent Plaintiff's 13] motion seeks legal advice, the Court is not permitted to provide it. 14 The motion is DENIED as moot. Docket No. 53. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 Dated: September 3, 2025

Nancy J. Koppe NN 18 United States Aagisteate Judge 19 .

20 21 22 23 24 25 26

' The Court liberally construes the filings of pro se litigants, particularly those who are 28] prisoners bringing civil rights claims. Blaisdell v. Frappiea, 729 F.3d 1237, 1241 (9th Cir. 2013).