Garza v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/3/18, ORDERING that defendant's response to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is EXTENDED until 1/22/2018. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL
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

CARLOS GARZA,
Plaintiff,

14
15
16

vs.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

17

Defendant.

18

Case No.: 2:17-cv-01076-EFB

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

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME OF 30
DAYS FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

19
20

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

21

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

22

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

23

Defendant. The current due date is December 22, 2017. The new due date will be January 22,

24

2018.

25

There is good cause for this request. Since the Court’s previous extension of time,

26

Defendant’s counsel has been diligently addressing her full workload including several district

27

court cases also previously extended, and one Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

28

matter involving discovery, depositions, and travel in November for a week. Moreover, in

1

1

December, Defendant’s counsel participated in a hearing for another employment case involving

2

travel and that was unexpectedly continued twice, into the week of December 18, 2017, the same

3

week as the original deadline for Defendant’s response due Friday, December 22.

4

Moreover, Defendant is requesting an additional 30 days because of pre-approved leave

5

in the months of December and early January, and additional unanticipated workload reasons,

6

such as briefing for the employment hearing matter that was continued twice in December,

7

described above.

8
9

Therefore, Defendant is respectfully requesting additional time up to and including
January 22, 2018, to fully review the record and research the issues presented by Plaintiff’s

10

motion for summary judgment in this case. This request is made in good faith with no intention

11

to unduly delay the proceedings.

12
13

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

14
15
16

Respectfully submitted,
Date: December 21, 2017

17

s/ Barbara M. Rizzo by C.Chen*
(As authorized by email on 12/20/2017)
BARBARA M. RIZZO
Attorneys for Plaintiff

18
19
20
21

Date: December 21, 2017

22
24
25
27
28

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
By s/ Carolyn B. Chen
CAROLYN B. CHEN
Special Assistant U. S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant

23

26

BARBARA M. RIZZO, ATTORNEY AT LAW

ORDER
APPROVED AND SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 3, 2018.

2