Parker v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
24
Joint Stipulation and Order for an extension of time, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 3/27/2017. (Defendant's Opposition due by 4/24/2017; Reply due by 5/9/2017) (Rosales, O)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
BEATRICE NA, CSBN 303390
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Social Security Administration
Office of the General Counsel
160 Spear St Ste 800
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 977-8967
Facsimile: (415) 744-0134
E-mail: beatrice.na@ssa.gov
Attorneys for Defendant
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
FRESNO DIVISION
13
14
BETTY JEAN PARKER,
15
16
17
18
19
Plaintiff,
vs.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:16-cv-00176-EPG
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR
AN EXTENSION OF TIME
(ECF No. 23)
20
21
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective
22
counsel of record, that Defendant’s time for responding to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
23
Judgment be extended for 30 days from March 24, 2017 to April 24, 2017 (April 23, 2017 is a
24
Sunday). This is Defendant’s second request for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s
25
Motion for Summary Judgment.
26
Defendant requests this extension due to her counsel’s heavy workload in February 2017
27
through April 2017. Since Defendant’s counsel was reassigned to this case on February 1, 2017,
28
Defendant’s counsel was responsible for conducting discovery in a personnel-related litigation
Joint Stip. & Order for Ext.; 1:16-cv-176-EPG
1
1
pending before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which required review
2
of Complainant’s responses to agency’s discovery requests and numerous documents in order to
3
investigate the relevant facts and to assist preparation for deposition of Complainant on March
4
10, 2017. After the deposition, Defendant’s counsel requested 6-week extension to conduct
5
further discovery, and is currently preparing to conduct deposition of multiple witnesses in April
6
2017. Defendant’s counsel was also responsible for two appellate briefs for a Social Security
7
case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and a bankruptcy case before the
8
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, in addition to at least 36
9
district court cases in a variety of stages.
10
Defendant’s counsel respectfully requests this additional time to expend the necessary
11
time to review the 1,223-page record and to evaluate the issues Plaintiff raises, and to submit
12
Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s motion for review by this Court.
13
14
15
The parties further stipulate that all subsequent deadlines set forth in the Court’s
Procedural Order for Social Security Review Actions shall be extended accordingly.
The parties stipulate in good faith, with no intent to prolong proceedings unduly.
16
Respectfully submitted,
17
Dated: March 23, 2017
/s/ Melissa Newel*
(* As authorized via email on March 23, 2017)
MELISSA NEWEL
18
19
Attorney for Plaintiff
20
21
22
Dated: March 23, 2017
PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
23
By:
24
25
/s/ Beatrice Na
BEATRICE NA
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant
26
27
28
Joint Stip. & Order for Ext.; 1:16-cv-176-EPG
2
1
ORDER
2
Based on the above stipulation and good cause appearing therein, the Court grants
3
Defendant an extension of time to file her opposition to Plaintiff’s opening brief. Defendant’s
4
opposition brief shall be filed no later than April 24, 2017. Plaintiff may file her reply brief no
5
later than May 9, 2017.
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
March 27, 2017
/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Joint Stip. & Order for Ext.; 1:16-cv-176-EPG
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?