Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 22

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 21 Plaintiff's Request for an Extension of Time, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/2/2015. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MANUEL GARCIA,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.
CAROLYN COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

15
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01744 - JLT
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME
(Doc. 16)

16
17

On August 28, 2015, the parties stipulated for an extension of the briefing schedule, requesting

18

that the Court grant an extension of forty-five days for Plaintiff to file an opening brief. (Doc. 21) The

19

Scheduling Order permits a single extension of thirty days by stipulation (Doc. 6 at 4), which was used

20

by Defendant to file a certified administrative record. (Docs. 13, 14) In addition, Defendant sought a

21

second extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s confidential letter brief. (Docs. 18-19)

22

Significantly, a scheduling order “is not a frivolous piece of paper, idly entered, which can be

23

cavalierly disregarded without peril.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 610 (9th

24

Cir. 1992). The deadlines are considered “firm, real and are to be taken seriously by parties and their

25

counsel.” Shore v. Brown, 74 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1260, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94828 at *7

26

(E.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2009).

27
28

Here, Plaintiff reports that “Plaintiff’s counsel will be on vacation [from] August 29 through
September 13, 2015, and Defendant has planned leave thereafter.” (Doc. 21 at 2) Therefore, Plaintiff
1

1

requests that the Court extend the filing deadline “from September 8, 2015 to October 23, 2015 for

2

Plaintiff to file an Opening Brief, with all other dates in the Court’s Order extended accordingly.” (Id.

3

at 1) However, there is no explanation as to why Plaintiff needs until October 23, 2015 to file an

4

opening brief, when his attorney will return from vacation on September 13, 2015. Presumably, the

5

remainder of the extension is for Defendant’s counsel, who fails to provide any information regarding

6

the duration of her leave and who has received two prior extensions of time in this action. Therefore,

7

the Court finds Plaintiffs have not demonstrated good cause for the extension requested.

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

9

1.

Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time is GRANTED in part; and

10

2.

Plaintiff SHALL file his opening brief no later than October 9, 2015.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 2, 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2