Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Morales v. Berryhill, 2:17-cv-02246-CKD. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180629c96 Visitors: 9
Filed: Jun. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 28, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (SECOND REQUEST) CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties through their respective counsel of record, with the Court's approval, that Defendant shall have an 8-day extension of time, from June 28, 2018 to July 6, 2018, to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. All other dates in the Court's Scheduling Order shall be extended accordingly. This is Defendant's second requ
More

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (SECOND REQUEST)

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties through their respective counsel of record, with the Court's approval, that Defendant shall have an 8-day extension of time, from June 28, 2018 to July 6, 2018, to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. All other dates in the Court's Scheduling Order shall be extended accordingly.

This is Defendant's second request for an extension of time. Defendant respectfully submits that good cause exists for a second short extension because Defendant's counsel was out of the office unexpectedly and requires additional time to complete her review of the record and analysis of the issues raised in Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and to prepare Defendant's response. Defendant's counsel also has a number of other briefs due and is trying diligently to manage competing workload demands. Plaintiff does not oppose Defendant's request for an extension of time.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS 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