Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Clemmons v. Berryhill, 18-CV-00578-LHK. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20181218a27 Visitors: 18
Filed: Dec. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 14, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PLAINTIFF'S REPLY ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for Plaintiff to reply to Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment shall be extended to December 26, 2018. This is Plaintiff's first request for extension of time on filing reply. Plaintiff's counsel requires additional time because she contracted flu an
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PLAINTIFF'S REPLY

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for Plaintiff to reply to Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment shall be extended to December 26, 2018. This is Plaintiff's first request for extension of time on filing reply. Plaintiff's counsel requires additional time because she contracted flu and was sick from December 6-11, 2018, causing frustration in capacity to review Defendant's Cross-Motion and Memorandum of Law in support thereof. Plaintiff has contacted Defendant's counsel about this proposed extension of time, and Defendant's counsel has no objection. The parties agree that Plaintiff shall has an extension of one week, to December 26, 2018, to file reply, and that all other deadlines shall be accordingly extended.

ORDER

APPROVED AND SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer