Grinstead v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 17

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/5/2014 ORDERING that Defendant shall have an extension of time of an additional 30 days to respond to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
DONNA L. CALVERT
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
CAROLYN B. CHEN, CSBN 256628
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

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

12
13

HAROLD GRINSTEAD,
Plaintiff,

14
15
16

vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

17

Defendant.

18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:14-cv-00059-KJN
STIPULATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF
TIME OF 30 DAYS FOR DEFENDANT’S
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

19

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective

20

counsel of record, that Defendant shall have an extension of time of an additional 30 days to

21

respond to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. This is the first continuance sought by

22

Defendant. The current due date is September 5, 2014. The new due date will be October 5,

23

2014.

24

There is good cause for this request. Defendant is seeking this extension due to

25

Defendant’s counsel’s heavy workload in the last two months and continuing heavy workload,

26

and due to pre-approved leave in September. For the last two months, Defendant’s counsel was

27

limited in her ability to work on this case due to two Equal Employment Opportunity

28

Commission (EEOC) cases, one of which had an out-of-state hearing in Phoenix, Arizona, and

Stipulation for an Extension of Time; 2:14-cv-00059-KJN

1

1

involved follow-up and written closing briefs after the hearing, while the other had a motion for

2

summary judgment coming due in September. Counsel also had a Ninth Circuit opposition brief

3

due in August, and has another Ninth Circuit answering brief due in the next month, and at least

4

16 pending district court cases at various stages of litigation in the next month. Because of the

5

factors described above, defense counsel is requesting additional time to fully review the

6

administrative record and research the issues presented by Plaintiff’s motion for summary

7

judgment.

8
9

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

10
11
12

Respectfully submitted,
Date: September 4, 2014

HADLEY & FRAULOB

13
s/ Joseph Fraulob by C.Chen*
(As authorized by e-mail on 9/4/2014)
JOSEPH FRAULOB
Attorneys for Plaintiff

14
15
16
17

Date: September 4, 2014

18

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
By s/ Carolyn B. Chen
CAROLYN B. CHEN
Special Assistant U. S. Attorney

19
20

Attorneys for Defendant

21
22

ORDER

23
24

APPROVED AND SO ORDERED:

25

Dated: September 5, 2014

26
27
28

Stipulation for an Extension of Time; 2:14-cv-00059-KJN

2