Hurtado v. Colvin

Filing 30

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 29 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER For Second Extension of Time to File Reply Brief filed by Jonathan Hurtado. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on August 3, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/3/2017)

Download PDF
4 JOANNA PARNES, State Bar No. 278974 BAY AREA LEGAL AID 1735 Telegraph Ave. Oakland, CA 94612 jparnes@baylegal.org Phone: (510) 663-4744 x5214 Fax: (510) 663-4740 5 Attorney for Plaintiff 1 2 3 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 CIVIL NO. 3:16-cv-05608-JST JONATHAN HURTADO, Plaintiff, v. STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE PLAINTIFF’S REPLY BRIEF Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant 17 18 The parties hereto, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate that Plaintiff, 19 Jonathan Hurtado, shall have an additional seven days, until August 14, 2017, in which to file and 20 serve a reply brief in this action. This is the second stipulation for extended time requested by Plaintiff 21 for this reply brief and is necessary due to scheduled travel and high workload demands. 22 The parties further stipulate that the Court’s Procedural Order for Social Security Review 23 Actions shall be modified accordingly. 24 Dated: August 2, 2017 By:____/s/____________________ 25 Joanna Parnes 26 Attorney for Plaintiff 27 28 1 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR -1FILING PLAINTIFF’S REPLY BRIEF - 3:16-cv-5608 1 2 Dated: August 2, 2017 By: __/s___ (as authorized via email) 3 Jeffrey Chen 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 [PROPOSED] ORDER: 6 PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 7 Dated: August 3, 2017 8 By: Hon. Jon S. Tigar 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR -2FILING PLAINTIFF’S REPLY BRIEF - 3:16-cv-5608

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?