CONWAY v. SHROPSHIRE et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
DEONTE CONWAY, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : CASE NO.: 7:25-CV-189 (LAG)
:
RALPH SHROPSHIRE, et al., :
:
Defendants. :
:
ORDER
Before the Court are Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (Doc.
27) and Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (Doc. 28). Therein, Defendants
ask the Court to extend the deadline for Defendants to answer Plaintiff’s Complaint through
Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (Docs. 27, 28). Defendants represent that they seek additional
time “to review the complaint, confer with Defendants, and to collect and review pertinent
case documents[.]” (Doc. 27 at 1–2). Defendants initially filed the Motion for Extension of
Time to Answer representing that Plaintiff only consented to a 15-day extension as opposed
to the 30-day extension Defendants were requesting. (Doc. 27 at 2). Defendants now
represent that Plaintiff consents to the 30-day extension. (Doc. 28 at 1). This is Defendants
second request for an extension. (See Docket).
Accordingly, Defendant’s Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (Doc.
28) is GRANTED and Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (Doc. 27) is
DENIED as moot. Defendants shall have until Wednesday, March 4, 2026, to answer or
otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint.
SO ORDERED, this 23rd day of January, 2026.
/s/ Leslie A. Gardner
Case 7:25-cv-00189-LAG Document 29 Filed 01/23/26 Page 1 of 2

2
LESLIE A. GARDNER, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 7:25-cv-00189-LAG Document 29 Filed 01/23/26 Page 2 of 2