RECEIVED JUL 28 1987
CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,
      v.
SCOTT M. GALINDEZ, Appellee,       No. (Cr. Nos. 87-60, 87-158)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,
      v.
STEPHEN SEMPLE, Appellee           No. (Cr. No. 87-61)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,
      v.
WILLIAM THOMAS, Appellee,          No. (Cr. No. 87-62)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,
      v.
PHILLIP JOSEPH, Appellee,          No. (Cr. No. 87-63)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,
      v.
ELLEN THOMAS, Appellee.            No. (Cr. No. 87-64)

Appellee, pro se, William Thomas respectfully moves for an extension of time in which to reply to Appellant's Motion for Summary Reversal. The reason for the requested enlargement is that Appellant's Motion For Summary Reversal, filed on July 21, 1987, and served by mail, was not received by appellee until July 24, 1987, First, it is not clear to appellee whether the Appeals Court Rules provide for additional time beyond seven days in which to respond to pleadings which are served by mail. In any event four days is simply not sufficient time for appellee to complete the research and prepare an adequate response to appellant 's motion.

Wherefore appellee respectfully requests that this Court grant him up to, and including August 3, 1987 in which to file a reply to appellant's Motion For Summary Reversal, Appellant will suffer no prejudice by this short delay, and the interests of justice will be served by allowing an untutored litigant sufficient time to prepare a meaningful pleading.

Respectfully submitted,

William Thomas
1440 N Street N.W., Apt. 410
Washington, D.C, 20005

I HEREBY CERTIFY that service of the foregoing Motion For Enlargement of Time has been made by mailing a copy thereof, postage prepaid, this 28th day of July, 1987, to John D. Bates, Assistant United States Attorney, judiciary Center Building, 555 4th Street N.W., Room 4126, Washington, D.C.

William Thomas