ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR A SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME (Doc. 15)

JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.

On August 15, 2016, Defendant filed a stipulation of the parties to extend time for the Commissioner to respond to Plaintiff's opening brief. (Doc. 15) Notably, the Scheduling Order allows for a single extension of thirty days by the stipulation of the parties (Doc. 5 at 4), which was previously used by Defendant. (Docs. 13, 14) Beyond the single extension, "requests to modify [the scheduling] order must be made by written motion and will be granted only for good cause." (Doc. 5 at 4)

Defendant's counsel, April Alongi, asserts that "since the prior extension, counsel has been handling a large number of District Court and Ninth Circuit cases in addition to this one, with thirteen briefs—one in the Ninth Circuit—due within the next twenty-five days." (Doc. 15 at 2) In addition, Ms. Alongi reports she "had numerous other deadlines, including numerous conferences in an employment case, a settlement memorandum, and multiple mentoring and reviewing duties in the Office of the General Counsel." (Id.) She also was "out of the office on leave for five days and has been intermittently absent due to illness." (Id.) Therefore, Ms. Alongi asserts additional time is needed "to properly respond to the issues Plaintiff raised in her Brief." (Id. at 3) Plaintiff does not oppose the request for a further extension of time for Defendant to file a responsive brief. (Id.) Good cause appearing, the Court ORDERS:

IT IS SO ORDERED.