De Jean v. Berryhill, 1:16-cv-00319-EPG. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20170913d60
Visitors: 8
Filed: Sep. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 12, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective undersigned attorneys, and with the permission of the Court as evidenced below, that the Defendant has 45 additional days to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant's Counsel's colleague requests this extension on Defendant's Counsel's behalf due to an unexpected personal emergency requiring Defendant's Counsel's absence from the
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective undersigned attorneys, and with the permission of the Court as evidenced below, that the Defendant has 45 additional days to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant's Counsel's colleague requests this extension on Defendant's Counsel's behalf due to an unexpected personal emergency requiring Defendant's Counsel's absence from the ..
More
STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION
ERICA P. GROSJEAN, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective undersigned attorneys, and with the permission of the Court as evidenced below, that the Defendant has 45 additional days to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant's Counsel's colleague requests this extension on Defendant's Counsel's behalf due to an unexpected personal emergency requiring Defendant's Counsel's absence from the office for several weeks.
This is the Commissioner's first extension request.
ORDER
Based on the above stipulation and good cause having been shown therein, Defendant's requests for a 45-day extension to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
