1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * * 6 JOSEPH ANTONETTI, Case No. 2:24-cv-00351-RFB-BNW 7 Petitioner, ORDER 8 v. 9 DWIGHT NEVEN, et al., 10 Respondents. 11 12 The Order follows the Court’s prior order granting Petitioner Joseph Antonetti’s Motion 13 for Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 19) and the Federal Public Defender’s Notice of Conflict 14 (ECF No. 20). 15 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following panel attorney is appointed as counsel for 16 petitioner pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) & (c), nunc pro tunc to November 6, 2025: 17 Greg S. Silvey 18 P.O. Box 5501 Boise, ID 83705 19 (208)286-7400 [email protected] 20 Counsel will represent petitioner in all federal proceedings related to this matter, including any 21 appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless allowed to withdraw. 22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner will have 90 days from entry of this order 23 to file an amended petition and/or seek other appropriate relief. This deadline and any extension 24 thereof may not be construed as implied findings regarding the federal limitation period or a basis 25 for tolling. Petitioner remains responsible, at all times, for calculating the running of the federal 26 limitation period and timely asserting claims, without regard to any court-ordered deadlines or 27 extensions. Thus, a petition or amended petition filed within a court-ordered deadline may still be 28 1 dismissed as untimely if it violates the statute of limitations. See Sossa v. Diaz,

, 2 1235 (9th Cir. 2013). 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents must file a response to the amended 4 petition, including potentially by motion to dismiss, within 60 days of service of an amended 5 petition. Petitioner may file a reply within 30 days of service of the answer. However, Local Rule 6 LR 7-2(b) governs the response and reply time to any motion filed by either party, including 7 motions filed in lieu of a pleading. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any procedural defenses Respondents raise to the 9 counseled amended petition must be raised together in a single, consolidated motion to dismiss. 10 Successive motions to dismiss will not be entertained, and any procedural defenses omitted from 11 the consolidated motion to dismiss will be waived. Respondents may not file a response that 12 consolidates their procedural defenses, if any, with their response on the merits. But arguments 13 that an unexhausted claim clearly lacks merit may be included a procedural-defense response. If 14 Respondents seek dismissal of unexhausted claims under

(b)(2) they must: (1) 15 do so in a single motion to dismiss, not in the answer; and (2) specifically direct their argument to 16 the standard for dismissal under § 2254(b)(2) as set forth in Cassett v. Stewart,

, 623– 17 24 (9th Cir. 2005). In short, no procedural defenses, including exhaustion, may be included with 18 the merits in an answer. All procedural defenses, including exhaustion, must be raised in a single 19 motion to dismiss. 20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in any answer filed on the merits, Respondents must 21 specifically cite to and address the applicable state court written decision and state court record 22 materials, if any, regarding each claim within the response as to that claim. 23 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents must file the state court exhibits relevant 24 to their response in chronological order. 25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all state court records, and related exhibits must be 26 filed in accordance with LR IA 10-3 and LR IC 2-2 and include a separate index identifying each 27 exhibit by number or letter. The index must be filed in CM/ECF’s document upload screen as the 28 base document to receive the base docket number (e.g., ECF No. 10). Each exhibit must then be 1| filed as “attachments” to the base document to receive a sequenced sub-docket number (e.g., 2| Exhibit A (ECF No. 10-1), Exhibit B (ECF No. 10-2), Exhibit C (ECF No. 10-3), and so forth). If 3 | the exhibits will span more than one filing, the base document in each successive filing must be either a copy of the index or volume cover page. See LR IC 2-2(a)(3)(A). 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notwithstanding LR IC 2-2(g), paper copies of any 6 | electronically filed exhibits need not be provided to chambers or to the staff attorney, unless later 7 | directed by the court. 8 DATED: November 10, 2025.

'0 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, I 1] UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_3-