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)

Download PDF
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?