Taylor v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 14

STIPULATION and ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S OPENING BRIEF, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/28/2018. (Kusamura, W)

Download PDF
1 7 MCGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration SHARON LAHEY Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: 415-977-8963 Facsimile: 415-744-0134 E-mail: Sharon.Lahey@ssa.gov 8 Attorneys for DEFENDANT 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 FRESNO 13 14 ROSEMARY TAYLOR, 15 Plaintiff, 16 vs. 17 18 19 NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:17-cv-01634-SKO STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S OPENING BRIEF; ORDER (Doc. 13) 20 21 ROSEMARY TAYLOR (Plaintiff) and NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner 22 Of Social Security (Defendant or the Commissioner), hereby stipulate, subject to the approval of 23 the Court, to a 30-day extension of time for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff’s Opening Brief 24 (Docket Number 12). This is the first request for an extension of time sought in the above- 25 captioned matter. The current deadline was August 24, 2018, and the new deadline would be 26 September 24, 2018. Defendant requests this additional time due to an inadvertent calendaring 27 error and workload. The undersigned currently has 11 oppositions to motions for summary 28 judgment or opening briefs and one oral argument due before the requested deadline. STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME; ORDER CASE NO.: 1:17-cv-01634-SKO 1 2 The parties further stipulate that the scheduling order in the above-captioned matter be modified accordingly. 3 Respectfully submitted, 4 LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE D. ROHLFING 5 6 Dated: August 27, 2018 By: /s/ Cyrus Safa* CYRUS SAFA Attorney for Plaintiff [*As authorized by e-mail on August 27, 2018] Dated: August 27, 2018 MCGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 By: /s/ Sharon Lahey SHARON LAHEY Assistant Regional Counsel 14 15 ORDER 16 17 Pursuant to the Court’s Scheduling Order, Defendant’s responsive brief was due to be filed no 18 later August 24, 2018. (Doc. 5.) The parties filed the above “Stipulation to Extend Time for Defendant 19 to Respond to Plaintiff’s Opening Brief” on August 27, 2018—three days after Defendant’s answering 20 brief deadline expired. (Doc. 13.) 21 The Court may extend time to act after the deadline has expired because of “excusable neglect.” 22 Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B). Here, although the Stipulation demonstrates good cause under to support the 23 24 25 26 27 request for extension of time (see Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4)), no such excusable neglect has been articulated—much less shown—to justify the untimeliness of the request. Notwithstanding this deficiency, given the absence of bad faith or prejudice to Plaintiff (as evidenced by her agreement to the extension of time after the deadline), and in view of the liberal construction of Fed. R. Civ. 6(b)(1) to effectuate the general purpose of seeing that cases are tried on the merits, see Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, 28 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME; ORDER CASE NO.: 1:17-cv-01634-SKO 1 2 Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1258–59 (9th Cir. 2010), the Court GRANTS the parties’ stipulated request. The parties are cautioned that future post hoc requests for extensions of time will be viewed with 3 disfavor. 4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant shall have an extension of time, to and including 5 6 7 8 September 24, 2018, by which to file her answering brief. All other deadlines set forth in the Scheduling Order (Doc. 5) are modified accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 Dated: August 28, 2018 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME; ORDER CASE NO.: 1:17-cv-01634-SKO .

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?