Singh v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
13
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME AND MODIFYING SCHEDULING ORDER. Plaintiffs opening brief shall be filed on or before November 25, 2016; Defendants responsive brief shall be filed on or before January 6, 2017; Plaintiff may file a reply brief on or before January 26, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/14/2016. (Hernandez, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
RASHPAL SINGH,
12
13
Plaintiff,
Case No.: 1:16-cv-00446-SAB
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME
AND MODIFYING SCHEDULING ORDER
v.
(ECF No. 12)
14
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
15
Defendant.
16
17
18
On November 10, 2016, Plaintiff filed a stipulation requesting an extension of time to file
19
his opening brief. (ECF No. 12.) Pursuant to the stipulation, Plaintiff will file his opening brief
20
on or before November 25, 2016. This request is granted, and the scheduling order is modified
21
as follows:
22
1.
Plaintiff’s opening brief shall be filed on or before November 25, 2016;
23
2.
Defendant’s responsive brief shall be filed on or before January 6, 2017;
24
3.
Plaintiff may file a reply brief on or before January 26, 2017; and
25
4.
The parties are advised that due to the impact of social security cases on the
26
Court’s docket and the Court’s desire to have cases decided in an expedient
27
manner, requests for modification of the briefing schedule will not routinely be
28
granted and will only be granted upon a showing of good cause. Further, requests
1
1
to modify the briefing schedule that are made on the eve of a deadline will be
2
looked upon with disfavor and may be denied absent good cause for the delay in
3
seeking an extension.
4
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
November 14, 2016
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?