Fuller v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
21
ORDER GRANTING 20 a Second Extension of Time, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/11/2017. Opening brief due by 5/17/2017. (Hall, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WILLIE EARL FULLER,
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL1,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
15
Defendant.
16
17
) Case No.: 1:16-cv-00216- JLT
)
) ORDER GRANTING A SECOND EXTENSION OF
) TIME
)
)
)
)
)
)
The parties filed a stipulation for a seven-day extension of time for Plaintiff to file an opening
18
brief. (Doc. 20) Notably, the Scheduling Order allows for a single extension of thirty days by the
19
stipulation (Doc. 8 at 4), which was previously used by Plaintiff. (Docs. 18, 19) Beyond that
20
extension, “requests to modify [the scheduling] order must be made by written motion and will be
21
granted only for good cause.” (Doc. 8 at 4) Accordingly, the Court construes the stipulation to be a
22
motion by Plaintiff for modification of the briefing schedule.
23
Plaintiff’s counsel reports a further extension is necessary because she had “significant and
24
unanticipated time away from the office.” (Doc. 20 at 2) In addition, Defendant does not object to the
25
request (see id.), and it does not appear there would be any prejudice caused to Defendant with the brief
26
27
1
28
Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court substitutes Nancy A. Berryhill for her predecessor, Carolyn W. Colvin, as the
defendant.
1
1
extension. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
2
1.
Plaintiff’s request for a second extension of time is GRANTED; and
3
2.
Plaintiff SHALL file a an opening brief on or before May 17, 2017.
4
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
May 11, 2017
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
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
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?