Vicari v. Astrue

Filing 29

ORDER Extending Deadlines Signed by Judge Illston on 5/14/12. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that Defendant shall have a second extension of time of 7 days to respond to Plaintiffs Mot ion for Attorneys Fees. Due to the heavy workload of the prior counsel for Defendant, this case was reassigned to counsel for Defendant Ann L. Maley on May 4, 2012. Ms. Maley was out of the office at the time of the reassignment and returned on May 8, 2012. Accordingly, counsel for Defendant needs a brief extension to draft the opposition. With the seven-day extension, Defendants response will be due May 17, 2012. The parties request that all other deadlines be adjusted accordingly. (tfS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 8 MELINDA L. HAAG, CSBN 132612 United States Attorney DONNA L. CALVERT, SBN IL 6191786 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration ANN L. MALEY, CSBN 176877 Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8974 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 E-Mail: Daniel.Talbert@ssa.gov 9 Attorneys for Defendant 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 MICHAEL J. VICARI, Plaintiff, ) ) ) v. ) ) MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) Defendant. ) ______________________________) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:09-CV-05238-SI STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR A 7-DAY EXTENSION FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that Defendant shall have a second extension of time of 7 days to respond to 21 Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees. Due to the heavy workload of the prior counsel for 22 Defendant, this case was reassigned to counsel for Defendant Ann L. Maley on May 4, 2012. Ms. 23 24 25 26 Maley was out of the office at the time of the reassignment and returned on May 8, 2012. Accordingly, counsel for Defendant needs a brief extension to draft the opposition. With the seven-day extension, Defendant’s response will be due May 17, 2012. The 27 parties request that all other deadlines be adjusted accordingly. 28 Respectfully submitted, Stip and Proposed Order for Extension for EAJA., 3:09-cv-05238-SI 1 2 Dated: May 8, 2012 3 4 5 MELINDA L. HAAG United States Attorney 6 7 s/ Harvey Sackett HARVEY SACKETT Attorney for Plaintiff (as authorized via email on 5/8/12) Date: May 8, 2012 8 9 By s/ Ann L. Maley ANN L. MALEY Special Assistant U. S. Attorney 10 Attorneys for Defendant 11 ORDER 12 13 14 15 Pursuant to stipulation, it is so ordered. Date: 5/14/12 _____________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stip and Proposed Order for Extension for EAJA., 3:09-cv-05238-SI 1

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?