Wiemers v. Astrue

Filing 19

ORDER granting 18 Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Brief. The defendant shall on or before October 1, 2012, file and serve its responsive brief; within one week after the defendant's responsive brief is filed, the plaintiff may file and serve a reply brief and either party may request oral argument or make any other request which may be permitted under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); and in the absence of an order setting the case for oral argument or scheduling further proceedings, the case shall be deemed to be submitted at the expiration of the time period specified in paragraph 3 hereof.Ordered by Senior Judge Warren K. Urbom. (EJL)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA KURTIS T. WIEMERS, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4:11CV3228 ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S BRIEF The defendant has requested an extension of time to respond to the plaintiff’s brief, ECF. No. 18. IT IS ORDERED that: 1. the Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Brief, ECF No. 18, is granted; 2. the defendant shall on or before October 1, 2012, file and serve its responsive brief; 3. within one week after the defendant's responsive brief is filed, the plaintiff may file and serve a reply brief and either party may request oral argument or make any other request which may be permitted under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); and 4. in the absence of an order setting the case for oral argument or scheduling further proceedings, the case shall be deemed to be submitted at the expiration of the time period specified in paragraph 3 hereof. Dated August 29, 2012. BY THE COURT ____________________________________________ Warren K. Urbom United States Senior District Judge

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?