ORDER GRANTING IN PART SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE ANSWER AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

Re: Dkt. No. 12

JOSEPH C. SPERO, Chief Magistrate Judge.

The Court previously granted a motion by Defendant Nancy Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, (the "Commissioner") for an extension of thirty days to file the Commissioner's answer and a copy of the administrative record in this action. The only stated reason for that motion was that the Commissioner had failed to compile the transcript by the deadline, with no explanation for that delay. The Commissioner has not met that extended deadline; instead, on the day that her answer was due, the Commissioner filed a motion for a second extension of an additional fourteen days, stating only that "the agency completed the administrative transcript, but only mailed one service copy to the U.S. Attorney's Office," rather than the two copies necessary to lodge with the Court and serve Plaintiff Sarah Garner, who is proceeding pro se. Garner has taken no position on either motion.

A party's failure to meet its obligations is not generally in itself a sufficient explanation for delay. The Court notes that, in at least some cases, the Commissioner strictly enforces deadlines applicable to claimants. See, e.g., Carty v. Berryhill, No. 17-cv-01212-JCS, 2017 WL 5525827 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2017) (granting the Commissioner's motion to dismiss an action filed after the deadline). Nevertheless, the motion is GRANTED in part, and the Commissioner's deadline is extended by seven days, resulting in a new deadline of December 3, 2018. The Commissioner will be granted no further extensions in this action without a showing of good cause for delay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.