MARILYN PATEL, District Judge
On June 1, 2010, petitioner sought sanctions against respondent for failure to timely produce jury questionnaires. Docket No. 49 (Motion). Respondent attributed his delay to the various procedural hurdles he encountered while unsealing the relevant documents. See Docket No. 51 (Response). The relevant documents were lodged with the court on June 16, 2010. Docket No. 52 (Notice). The motion for sanctions is therefore DENIED.
Petitioner failed to timely file a traverse by June 16, 2010. See Docket No. 43 (Order). It appears that counsel for petitioner was unavailable on this day. Docket No. 50 (Notice of Unavailability). Moreover, the jury questionnaires do not appear to have been provided to the petitioner until June 16, 2010, the last day for petitioner to file his traverse. Petitioner is granted an extension of time, and is to file his traverse, if any, on or before August 2, 2010. Since respondent did not have the ability to review the jury questionnaires prior to filing his answer, respondent is also granted leave to file a supplemental response to the traverse, if any, by September 3, 2010.
IT IS SO ORDERED.