Arriaga v. Astrue
Filing
17
ORDER Regarding Briefing Schedule. Ordered by Senior Judge Warren K. Urbom. (EJL)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
DAVID ARRIAGA SR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of
Social Security Administration,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
8:11CV261
ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE
The above-captioned case was filed and assigned for full disposition to the docket of
Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken on July 29, 2011. The government filed its Answer on
December 19, 2011, and a Scheduling Packet was sent to counsel. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(2)
each party was given the deadline of January 20, 2012, “to consent to have a United States
Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in the case, including the trial, and order
the entry of a final judgment” and a briefing schedule was established.
On January 9, 2012, counsel acknowledged the availability of a United States Magistrate
Judge but elected to have this case randomly assigned to a United States District Judge. After
conferring with both counsel,
IT IS ORDERED that:
1.
the briefing schedule of December 19, 2011, ECF filing 15, shall remain in effect;
therefore, the plaintiff shall have on or before February 22, 2012, in which to file and
serve a brief in support of the plaintiff's position;
2.
the defendant shall have on or before March 22, 2012, in which it shall file and serve
a response brief;
3.
the plaintiff may file and serve a reply brief on or before April 6, 2012, 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 January 10, 2012.
BY THE COURT
s/ Warren K. Urbom
United States Senior District Judge
-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?