Applegate v. Astrue

Filing 20

ORDER granting 19 Defendant's Second Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Brief. The defendant shall have on or before September 24, 2012, in which to file and serve its response brief; within one week after the defendant's response brief is filed, the plaintiff may file 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 MERLE LAMONT APPLEGATE, Plaintiff, 4:12CV3029 vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security; ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S SECOND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF Defendant. The defendant has filed a second unopposed motion for time to respond to plaintiff’s brief, ECF No. 19. IT IS ORDERED that: 1. the Defendant’s Second Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Brief, ECF No. 19, is granted; 2. the defendant shall have on or before September 24, 2012, in which to file and serve its response brief; 3. within one week after the defendant's response brief is filed, the plaintiff may file 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 27, 2012. BY THE COURT 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?