Maupin v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

ORDER GRANTING IN PART UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME 22 . Defendant may file her opposition to Plaintiff's opening brief by no later than July 21, 2017. Plaintiff may file her optional reply brief by no later than August 7, 2017. The Court CAUTIONS the parties that it will not entertain any further requests for extensions in this matter. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/13/2017. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL, CSBN 230138
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
JENNIFER LEE TARN, CSBN 240609
Special Assistant United States Attorney
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - FRESNO

12
13

MARJORIE MAUPIN,

14
15
16
17
18

Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social
Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:16-cv-00722-SKO
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FIRST
EXTENSION OF TIME; ORDER
GRANTING IN PART
(Doc. 22)

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Marjorie Maupin (Plaintiff) and
Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (Defendant), by and
through their respective counsel of record, that Defendant shall have an extension of
time of forty-five (45) days to file her Opposition to Plaintiff’s Opening Brief. The
current due date is June 21, 2017. The new date will be August 7, 2017. An extension
of time is needed because the attorney responsible for briefing this case had to take leave

26
27
28

-1-

1

in March and April due to surgery and is continuing to work through a backlog of cases.

2

This request is made in good faith with no intention to unduly delay the proceedings.

3

This is the first extension of time requested by Defendant in the above-captioned

4

matter. The parties further stipulate that the Court’s Scheduling Order shall be modified

5

accordingly, such that Plaintiff’s reply shall be due

6
7

Respectfully submitted,
Date: June 9, 2017

By:

8
9

/s/ Kelsey Mackenzie Brown*
KELSEY MACKENZIE BROWN
Attorney for Plaintiff
(*As authorized by e-mail on June 9, 2017)

10
11

Date: June 9, 2017

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney

12
13
14
15
16

By:

/s/ Jennifer Lee Tarn
JENNIFER LEE TARN
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant

17
18

ORDER

19
20

Before the Court is the above “Unopposed Motion for First Extension of Time”

21

(the “Motion”), in which Defendant requests, and Plaintiff stipulates to, “an extension of

22

forty-five (45) days to file her Opposition to Plaintiff’s Opening Brief.” (Doc. 22.) The

23
24

Court finds that an extension is warranted. However, the Court is not persuaded that an

25

extension of forty-five days is appropriate.

26
27
28

-2-

1
2

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Motion in part, and ORDERS that:
(1) Defendant may file her opposition to Plaintiff's opening brief by no later than

3
4
5
6

July 21, 2017; and
(2) Plaintiff may file her optional reply brief by no later than August 7, 2017.
The Court CAUTIONS the parties that it will not entertain any further requests for

7
8

extensions in this matter.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
12

Dated:

June 13, 2017

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-3-

.