Glaum v. Braun et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Joseph E. Glaum, 	)
)
) 	ORDER DENYING MOTION
) 	FOR RESPONSIVE DEADLINE
) 	EXTENSIONS
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
Colby Braun and Warden Joseph Joyce,
) 	Case No.: 1:24-cv-00146
)
Defendants. 	)
On December 23, 2025, Plaintiff Joseph Glaum (“Plaintiff”) filed a Motion for Responsive
Deadline Extensions. (Doc. No. 102). Therein, Plaintiff requested the court allow him twenty (20)
days to respond to pleadings filed by the Defendants, regarding an answer or other responsive
pleadings that would normally allow for fourteen (14) days.
The court is inclined to DENY Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 102) without prejudice. It does
not appear that there are any pending motions to which Plaintiff may require additional time to
respond. Moreover, the court is not persuaded that proactive deadline extensions are currently
necessary. In the event there are future motions filed, Plaintiff may make the appropriate motions
to request an extension of time as necessary, and the Court shall address each motion accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 30th day of December, 2025.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
Case 1:24-cv-00146-CRH Document 107 Filed 12/30/25 Page 1 of 1