Magnus v. Berryhill, 2:18-cv-00474-CMK. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181126866
Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2018
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR ACCEPTA NCE OF LATE-FILED BRIEF DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by the parties, through their respective counsel of record, subject to the approval of the Court, agree that Defendant's Cross-Motion and Opposition to Plaintiff's filed on November 16, 2018 (Dkt. 22) is timely. Counsel for Defendant sought a one-day extension of time due to her chronic migraines that she experiences, which impairs her vision (including causing bl
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR ACCEPTA NCE OF LATE-FILED BRIEF DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by the parties, through their respective counsel of record, subject to the approval of the Court, agree that Defendant's Cross-Motion and Opposition to Plaintiff's filed on November 16, 2018 (Dkt. 22) is timely. Counsel for Defendant sought a one-day extension of time due to her chronic migraines that she experiences, which impairs her vision (including causing blu..
More
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR ACCEPTA NCE OF LATE-FILED BRIEF
DENNIS M. COTA, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by the parties, through their respective counsel of record, subject to the approval of the Court, agree that Defendant's Cross-Motion and Opposition to Plaintiff's filed on November 16, 2018 (Dkt. 22) is timely. Counsel for Defendant sought a one-day extension of time due to her chronic migraines that she experiences, which impairs her vision (including causing blurred vision and loss of vision in her left eye). As a result of her light sensitivity, Counsel was not able to continue working on Defendant's response and sought a one-day extension of time, which Counsel for Plaintiff did not object to the requested relief. Subsequently, on November 16, 2018, Defendant filed her response (Dkt 22). On November 19, 2018, the Court denied Defendant's motion of extension of time without prejudice (Dkt 23). Pursuant to the Court's Order, the parties, now file the stipulation for acceptance of late-filed brief. Defendant makes this request in good faith with no intention to unduly delay the proceedings. The parties further stipulate that the Court's Scheduling Order shall be modified accordingly.
ORDER
APPROVED AND SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
