Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Martinez v. Berryhill, 17-cv-1133-KRS. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. New Mexico Number: infdco20180425d29 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 24, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION KEVIN R. SWEAZEA , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for an Extension of Time to File Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse and/or Remand (Doc. 20), filed April 24, 2018. Having reviewed the motion, the Court FINDS and CONCLUDES that Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file his motion is well-taken and should be granted. The Court further FINDS and CONCLUDES that Plaintiff's
More

ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for an Extension of Time to File Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse and/or Remand (Doc. 20), filed April 24, 2018. Having reviewed the motion, the Court FINDS and CONCLUDES that Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file his motion is well-taken and should be granted. The Court further FINDS and CONCLUDES that Plaintiff's request to extend the response and reply deadlines is not well-taken and should be denied.

In so finding, the Court notes that Plaintiff asks the Court to "extend" Defendant's response deadline to May 23, 2018, and Plaintiff's reply deadline to June 6, 2018. However, the requested dates actually reduce the current deadlines of June 25, 2018 and August 20, 2018, respectively. See Order Granting in Part Plaintiff's Motion for an Extension (Doc. 19).

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file and serve his motion to reverse or remand agency decision together with a supporting memorandum of law on or before May 9, 2018. The remaining deadlines shall remain in full force and effect.

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