Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 68 Motion to Dismiss — USA v. Harun (Dkt. 69, S.D. Ga.)

Summary

A pro se Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Government's Motion to Dismiss, filed 05/28/25 as Document 69 by Petitioner Gladys Harun in Gladys Harun v. United States of America, Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, Dublin Division. Citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1), it asks for thirty days to respond to the government's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 68) the § 2255 Petition, stating that the government's Certificate of Service used an incorrect address and that the petitioner learned of the motion on May 20, 2025, after the May 15, 2025 response deadline; a May 20, 2025 letter to the Assistant United States Attorney and certificates of service are attached.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 1 of 7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

DUBLIN DIVISION
GLADYS HARUN, ( te, —

Petitioner, CASE NO. 3:23- CR-00003 DHB-BKE
Vv.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO GOVERNMENT’S MOTION
TO DISMISS

Petitioner Gladys Harun, proceeding pro se and currently residing at the halfway house- Dimas
Charity Macon, 744 2nd Street, Macon, GA 31201, respectfully moves pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings to enlarge the
time for filing her response to Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss the § 2255 Petition by thirty (30)
days. In support, Petitioner shows the Court as follows:

I. Introduction and Relief Requested

Petitioner filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On
May 1, 2025, the United States filed its Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 68) and served Petitioner by
mail. By the Certificate of Service, the government represented it was mailed to Petitioner at 714
Second Street, Macon, GA 31201—a bad address.

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1), “[wJhen an act may or must be done within a specified time, the
court may, for good cause, extend the time ... on motion made after the time has expired if the
party failed to act because of excusable neglect.” The Rules Governing Section 2255
Proceedings incorporate Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(b) for extensions.

Petitioner seeks a thirty-day extension of time—until thirty days from entry of the order—to file
her response to the Motion to Dismiss.

II. Background

4, On February 12, 2025, Petitioner filed her § 2255 Motion (Doc. 1). On May 1, 2025, the
United States Attorney’s Office filed its Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 68) and Certificate of Service
Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 2 of 7
representing service by First-Class Mail, addressed to 714 Second Street, Macon, GA 31201.
That address is incorrect; Petitioner has lived at Dimas Charity Macon, 744 2nd Street, Macon,
GA 31201, since entering the halfway house.

5. Petitioner did not receive the Motion to Dismiss. On May 20, 2025, Petitioner spoke by phone
both with the Clerk’s Office and an Assistant U.S. Attorney. She learned for the first time of the
government’s Motion and that her response deadline was May 15, 2025.

III. Timeline of Events
* 05/01/2025 — USAO filed Motion to Dismiss; Certificate of Service lists incorrect address.
* 05/15/2025 — Response due date under Local Rule 7.6.

* 05/20/2025 — Petitioner learned of both the Motion and the expired deadline and conferred with
Court staff and USAO.

IV. Legal Standard

6. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) permits enlargement of time after expiration “for good
cause” or upon a showing of “excusable neglect.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). The Rules Governing
Section 2255 Proceedings adopt these enlargement provisions. See Rules Governing § 2255
Proceedings, Rule 12.

7. In Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380, 382-83 (1993), the
Supreme Court held that inadvertent failures may constitute excusable neglect under Rule
9006(b)(1) (analogous to Rule 6(b)). Courts consider: (1) the reason for delay and whether it was
within the party’s control; (2) the prejudice to the adversary; (3) the party’s good faith; and (4)
the length of delay and its impact on judicial proceedings. 507 U.S. at 395.

8. The Eleventh Circuit applies Pioneer’s four-factor test to Rule 6(b) extensions. See Perez v.
Miami-Dade Cnty., 297 F.3d 1255, 1263-64 (11th Cir. 2002).

V. Argument
9. The Pioneer factors weigh heavily in favor of granting relief:

a. Reason for Delay. The delay resulted from the government’s mis-mailing to an incorrect
address, not any fault of Petitioner. A mis-addressed certificate of service is akin to non-delivery
by opposing counsel.

b. Prejudice. Granting a 30-day extension will not prejudice the United States because the case is
in its early stages and a brief delay will not affect the Court’s calendar.
Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 3 of 7
c. Good Faith. Petitioner acted in good faith. As soon as she discovered the Motion and missed
deadline on May 20, 2025, he sought clarification from the Court and USAO.

d. Length of Delay. The delay is minimal—five days beyond the May 15 deadline before
discovery—and will not disrupt proceedings.

10. Under these circumstances, Petitioner’s neglect was excusable. To deny the extension would
punish Petitioner for Respondent’s error, contrary to the excusable neglect principle.

VI. Conclusion and Prayer for Relief
For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court enter an order:

a. Extending the deadline to file her response to the government’s Motion to Dismiss by thirty
days from the date of entry of the order; and

b. Granting such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted this 20th day of May, 2025.

Gladys Harun, Pro Se

Dimas Charity Macon

744 2nd Street

Macon, GA 31201
Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 4 of 7
May 20, 2025

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Attorney’s Office

P.O. Box 8970

Savannah, GA 31412

Petitioner, CASE NO. 3:23- CR-00003 DHB-BKE

Dear Assistant United States Attorney:

] write as a pro se litigant in the above-captioned case to notify you of an error in the Certificate
of Service for the Government’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8), filed May 1, 2025. The Certificate
indicates service upon me at “714 Second Street, Macon, GA 31201,” which is incorrect.

Please update your records to reflect my correct mailing address:

Gladys Harun, Pro Se
Dimas Charity Macon
744 2nd Street
Macon, GA 31201

I respectfully request that all future filings, pleadings, and correspondence in this matter be sent
to the address above to ensure proper service and facilitate timely communication. Thank you for
your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Gladys Harun, Pro Se
Dimas Charity Macon
744 2nd Street
Macon, GA 31201
Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 5 of 7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION

GLADYS HARUN,

Petitioner, CASE NO. 3:23- CR-00003 DHB-BKE
V.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 20, 2025, I filed Gladys Harun’s Motion for Extension of Time to
Respond to Government’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) an via mail to the court.

| further certify that on May 20, 2025, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion
to be mailed via First-Class U.S. Mail to:

Assistant United States Attorney
United States Attorney’s Office
P.O. Box 8970

Savannah, GA 31412

Dated: May 20, 2025

Gladys Harun, Pro Se
Dimas Charity Macon
744 2nd Street
Macon, GA 31201

Ke—BHr
Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 6 of 7
Case 3:23-0-000

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

oo BKE Document 68 Filed 05/01/25 Page 26 of 26

S is to certify that I have on this day served all the parties in this case in

accor
cordance with the notice of electronic filing (“NEF”) that was generated as a

result of electronic filing in this Court. In addition, I mailed a paper copy v1a US,

Postal Service to:
Gladys Harun, Reg. No. 09407-510
714 Second Street
Macon, GA 31201

This May 1, 2025.

Respectfully submitted,

TARA M. LYONS
ACTING UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY

s/f Channell V. Singh

Channell V. Singh

Assistant United States Attorney

Georgia Bar No. 216540

P.O. Box 8970
Savannah, Georgia 31412

Mo Qo¥ $64

Zl4(X

“ashes

ial oe
Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE     Document 69     Filed 05/28/25     Page 7 of 7
ATLANTA GA RPDC 302

INSPECTEDMAY 2025 PM5 As S

MAY 2 8 2025

Dis mass Chonner

Tes gnd Sreet

Maun Ga 319d\
U.S. Marshals Service/Sa/

Sd Uhern Qistack Cre

Savanah Gq Style

AIAiseAaseARaASG Neigiety pel ligeiylip My ete a igenbHhall


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.gasd.89545.69.0.pdf

Size

1,070,029 bytes

SHA-256

5b80e4750830290ef0dd6b7ff9e5e5190308bc4f468fa191ef30b066aae63f7a

Our copy

gov.uscourts.gasd.89545.69.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)