Boudreau v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 21

ORDER RE STIPULATION EXTENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE.IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Plaintiffs opening brief shall be filed on or before March 26, 2018; Defendants responsive pleading shall be filed on or before April 25, 2018; Plaintiffs reply, if any, s hall be filed on or before May 10, 2018; and The parties are reminded that due to the impact of social security cases on the Courts docket and the Courts desire to have cases decided in an expedient manner, requests for modification of the briefing scheduling will not routinely be granted and will only be granted upon a showing of good cause. Further, requests to modify the briefing schedule that are made on the eve of a deadline will be looked upon with disfavor and may be denied absent good c ause for the delay in seeking an extension. If done after a deadline, the party seeking an extension must show additional good cause why the matter was filed late with the request for nunc pro tunc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/14/2018. (Hernandez, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MAURICE RAYMOND BOUDREAU,
Plaintiff,

12
13

Case No. 1:15-cv-00088-LJO-SAB
ORDER RE STIPULATION EXTENDING
BRIEFING SCHEDULE

v.
(ECF No. 20)

14

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

15
16
17

On February 14, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation extending the time for Plaintiff to file

18 his opening brief in this action. (ECF No. 20.) Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, IT IS
19 HEREBY ORDERED that:
20

1.

Plaintiff’s opening brief shall be filed on or before March 26, 2018;

21

2.

Defendant’s responsive pleading shall be filed on or before April 25, 2018;

22

3.

Plaintiff’s reply, if any, shall be filed on or before May 10, 2018; and

23

4.

The parties are reminded that due to the impact of social security cases on the

24

Court’s docket and the Court’s desire to have cases decided in an expedient

25

manner, requests for modification of the briefing scheduling will not routinely be

26

granted and will only be granted upon a showing of good cause. Further, requests

27

to modify the briefing schedule that are made on the eve of a deadline will be

28

looked upon with disfavor and may be denied absent good cause for the delay in

1

1

seeking an extension. If done after a deadline, the party seeking an extension

2

must show additional good cause why the matter was filed late with the request

3

for nunc pro tunc.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7 Dated:

February 14, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2