Rojas v. Astrue
Filing
17
ORDER granting in part plaintiff's 15 unopposed Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff is granted a 30-day extension starting from today. Signed by Hon. Mary Alice Theiler.(GB)
01
02
03
04
05
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
06
07
08 REBECCA ROJAS,
09
10
11
12
13
14
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
)
Commissioner of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
____________________________________ )
CASE NO. C12-1639-MAT
ORDER GRANTING LIMITED
EXTENSION OF TIME OF
REMAINING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Plaintiff filed the parties’ first unopposed motion for extension of time (Dkt. 15),
15 requesting a 60-day extension of the due date in which to file his responsive brief. Plaintiff
16 offers no specific reason for such an unusually long extension.
Having considered the
17 stipulation, and the entire docket in the case, the Court hereby GRANTS an extension of the
18 briefing schedule, but declines to use the dates requested by the parties. A 60-day extension
19 would adversely affect the Court’s ability to decide the case in a timely manner. The Court
20 therefore grants a 30-day extension from today, with the new deadlines as follows:
21
22
ORDER GRANTING LIMITED EXTENSION OF
TIME OF REMAINING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
PAGE -1
01
Plaintiff’s Opening Brief:
February 25, 2013
02
Defendant’s Responsive Brief:
March 25, 2013
03
Plaintiff’s optional Reply Brief:
April 8, 2013
04
The parties should note that any extension request after this one would impact the ability
05 of defendant to request an extension when the responsive brief is due, and should plan
06 accordingly.
07
DATED this 24th day of January, 2013.
08
09
A
10
Mary Alice Theiler
United States Magistrate Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
ORDER GRANTING LIMITED EXTENSION OF
TIME OF REMAINING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
PAGE -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?