Strassner v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 2:18-cv-01500-APG-NJK. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20181219e46
Visitors: 2
Filed: Dec. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2018
Summary: Order [Docket No. 20] NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend the deadline for Plaintiff to file his opening motion. Docket No. 20. The stipulation is defective. First, the stipulation does not provide a signature block for use if the Court approves the relief sought. See Local Rule IA 6-2. 1 Second, and more significantly, the stipulation is again premised on problems facing the "Appellate Attorney Writer." Docket No. 20 at 1; see also
Summary: Order [Docket No. 20] NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend the deadline for Plaintiff to file his opening motion. Docket No. 20. The stipulation is defective. First, the stipulation does not provide a signature block for use if the Court approves the relief sought. See Local Rule IA 6-2. 1 Second, and more significantly, the stipulation is again premised on problems facing the "Appellate Attorney Writer." Docket No. 20 at 1; see also ..
More
Order
[Docket No. 20]
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend the deadline for Plaintiff to file his opening motion. Docket No. 20. The stipulation is defective.
First, the stipulation does not provide a signature block for use if the Court approves the relief sought. See Local Rule IA 6-2.1
Second, and more significantly, the stipulation is again premised on problems facing the "Appellate Attorney Writer." Docket No. 20 at 1; see also Docket No. 18 (seeking an extension because the "Appellate Attorney Writer" had several other briefs due). Attorneys who practice law in this District must generally be admitted here or must seek permission to appear pro hac vice. See Local Rules IA 11-1, 11-2. It is unclear whether the unidentified "Appellate Attorney Writer" is inappropriately practicing law in this Court without permission to do so. It is also unclear why the actual attorneys of record (Richard Harris and Joshua Harris) cannot themselves draft the opening motion so that the Court's deadline can be met. It is generally not good cause for an extension to indicate that one of several attorneys is facing scheduling difficulties.
Notwithstanding the above, and as a one-time courtesy, the Court will GRANT the stipulation and EXTEND the deadline to file the opening motion to January 19, 2019. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. It is also less than ideal for an attorney who has been given two months to file an opening motion to wait to seek an extension of that deadline until the day of the deadline itself.
Source: Leagle
