Sepulveda v. Saul

Filing 15

Order by Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero granting 14 Second Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. The parties are reminded that unopposed requests to extend time should be filed as stipulations rather than motions. (jcslc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2021)

Download PDF
Case 3:20-cv-06550-JCS Document 15 Filed 02/18/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ELIA LORENA SEPULVEDA, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California ORDER GRANTING SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME v. ANDREW SAUL, Re: Dkt. No. 14 Defendant. 11 12 Case No. 20-cv-06550-JCS The Court previously granted an unopposed motion by Defendant Andrew Saul, 13 Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”), to continue the deadline to file the 14 Commissioner’s answer and the certified administrative record from December 21, 2020 to 15 February 19, 2021 based on delays in processing caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The 16 Commissioner now moves to continue that deadline further, to April 20, 2021. Sufficient cause 17 having been shown, and taking into account the Commissioner’s assertion that Plaintiff Elia 18 Sepulveda does not oppose the request, that motion is GRANTED. 19 The Commissioner is reminded that under this Court’s local rules, unopposed requests for 20 an extension of time should be filed as stipulations rather than motions. Civ. L.R. 6-2; see also 21 Civ. L.R. 6-3(a)(2) (providing that any motion to enlarge time must “[d]escribe[] the efforts the 22 party has made to obtain a stipulation to the time change” (emphasis added)). The Commissioner 23 is also reminded that where, as here, the cause for delay is foreseeable in advance of the deadline, 24 any motion for an extension should be filed well before the deadline sought to be extended, 25 allowing at least sufficient time for a response to be filed in the four days provided by Civil Local 26 Rule 6-3(b). 27 28 Before seeking any further extensions of the deadline to answer and file the administrative record in this case, the parties shall meet and confer regarding Sepulveda’s objections to the Case 3:20-cv-06550-JCS Document 15 Filed 02/18/21 Page 2 of 2 1 administrative decision to determine whether there is any potential to resolve the case before the 2 certified record has been prepared. Any further request for an extension must certify that the 3 parties have done so. 4 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 18, 2021 ______________________________________ JOSEPH C. SPERO Chief Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?