Maria Teresa Cisneros-Bello v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER GRANTING 19 Defendant's Request for an Extension of Time, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 10/17/2016. Defendant's responsive brief shall be filed by 10/31/2016. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARIA THERESA CISNEROS- BELLO,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

15
Defendant.
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01698- JLT
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S REQUEST
FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME
(Doc. 19)

17
18

On October 13 2016, Defendant filed a stipulation of the parties to extend time for Plaintiff to

19

serve a confidential letter brief. (Doc. 19) Importantly, the Scheduling Order allows only for a single

20

extension of thirty days by the stipulation of the parties (Doc. 5 at 4), and this is the fourth extension

21

sought in the action. (See Docs. 10, 13, 15) Beyond the single extension by stipulation, “requests to

22

modify [the scheduling] order must be made by written motion and will be granted only for good

23

cause.” (Doc. 5 at 4) Thus, the Court construes the stipulation of the parties to be a motion by

24

Defendant for further modification of the Scheduling Order.

25

Significantly, the parties were previously cautioned that “no further extensions will be granted

26

without the showing of exceptionally good cause.” (Doc. 14 at 2) Here, Defendant’s counsel, Timothy

27

Bolin, asserts the extension is necessary because he “has been sick and out of the office intermittently

28

in September 2016, and was required to attend several mandatory trainings for attorneys in the office in
1

1

September 2016.” (Doc. 19 at 1) In addition, Mr. Bolin reports that he had an “inordinately heavy

2

caseload from September 2016 through October 2016.” (Id.) Therefore, he “respectfully requests this

3

additional time to review the Administrative Record and to evaluate and respond to Plaintiff’s

4

arguments.” (Id. at 2)

5

The Court finds Defendant fails to demonstrate “exceptionally good cause” for the extension of

6

time in this matter. Counsel has not provided sufficient information such that the Court is able to find

7

he could not timely prepare an opening brief in the matter. On the other hand, the Court recognizes

8

Counsel’s illness was clearly unplanned and impacted the ability to complete work in a timely fashion,

9

and Plaintiff does not oppose the request. (See Doc. 19)

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

11

1.

Defendant’s request for an extension of time is GRANTED;

12

2.

Defendant SHALL serve a responsive brief no later than October 31, 2016;

13

3.

The parties are advised that the Court contemplates that no further extensions of time
will be sought; and

14
15

4.

If Defendant fails to file the responsive brief in compliance with this deadline ordered
by the Court, the matter will be decided without any input by Defendant.

16
17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 17, 2016

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2