Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER RE STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S OPENING BRIEF. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Defendant shall file a response to Plaintiffs opening brief on or before December 21, 2017; Plaintiffs reply, if any, shall be filed on or before January 5, 2018; andThe parties are advised that due to the impact of social security cases on the Courts docket and the Courts desire to have cases decided in an expedient manner, requests for modification of the br iefing scheduling will not routinely be granted and will only be granted upon a showing of good cause. Further, requests to modify the briefing schedule that are made on the eve of a deadline will be looked upon with disfavor and may be denied absent good cause for the delay in seeking an extension. If done after a deadline, the party seeking an extension must show additional good cause why the matter was filed late with the request for nunc pro tunc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/6/2017. (Hernandez, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EULALIA PEREZ,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,

Case No. 1:17-cv-00112-SAB
ORDER RE STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S OPENING
BRIEF
(ECF No. 19)

15
Defendant.
16
17

On November 3, 2017, Defendant filed a stipulation to extend the time for her to file her

18 response to Plaintiff’s opening brief. (ECF No. 19.)
19

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

20

1.

Defendant shall file a response to Plaintiff’s opening brief on or before December
21, 2017;

21
22

2.

Plaintiff’s reply, if any, shall be filed on or before January 5, 2018; and

23

3.

The parties are advised that due to the impact of social security cases on the

24

Court’s docket and the Court’s desire to have cases decided in an expedient

25

manner, requests for modification of the briefing scheduling will not routinely be

26

granted and will only be granted upon a showing of good cause.

27

requests to modify the briefing schedule that are made on the eve of a deadline

28

will be looked upon with disfavor and may be denied absent good cause for the

1

Further,

1

delay in seeking an extension. If done after a deadline, the party seeking an

2

extension must show additional good cause why the matter was filed late with the

3

request for nunc pro tunc.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7 Dated:

November 6, 2017
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