Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 15

ORDER STRIKING Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice From the Record 14 , signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 4/11/2018. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
EUGENIA BROWN,

11

Case No. 1:17-cv-00950-SAB
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE FROM
THE RECORD

Plaintiff,

12
v.

13

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

14

(ECF No. 14)

Defendant.

15
16

On July 14, 2017, Plaintiff filed this action. On July 17, 2017, the Court issued a

17

18 scheduling order. (ECF No. 3-1.) The scheduling order states that Plaintiff’s reply brief shall be
19 filed with the Court within 15 days after service of Defendant’s responsive brief. Defendant’s
1
20 responsive brief was filed on March 23, 2018. (ECF No. 13.) Therefore, the deadline for

21 Plaintiff to file a reply brief was April 9, 2018.
On April 10, 2018, Plaintiff filed a reply brief, which she docketed as a request for

22

23 judicial notice. (ECF No. 14.) Therefore, Plaintiff’s reply brief was filed a day late. Plaintiff
24 did not file a stipulation or motion to file her reply brief nunc pro tunc.
In the Court’s January 5, 2018 order denying the stipulation for an extension of time to

25

26 file the opening brief as unnecessary, the Court advised the parties that requests for modification
27 of the briefing schedule would not routinely be granted and would only be granted upon a
28

1

The Court notes that Plaintiff was electronically served with Defendant’s responsive brief on March 23, 2013.

1

1 showing of good cause. (ECF No. 10.) In addition, the parties were advised that for requests to
2 modify the briefing schedule done after a deadline, the party seeking an extension must show
3 additional good cause why the matter was filed late with the request for nunc pro tunc.
Therefore, the request for judicial notice shall be stricken from the record. If Plaintiff

4

5 wishes to file a reply brief, she must file a request to file her reply brief nunc pro tunc, setting
6 forth the appropriate legal rationale, along with her reply brief.2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the request for judicial notice (ECF No.

7

8 14) is STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD.
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated:

April 11, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2

She should also be careful to select the correct event when docketing her reply brief. Her reply brief should not be

28 docketed as a request for judicial notice.

2