JOHN v. BERRYHILL, 2:17-cv-00867-EFB. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20171108885
Visitors: 12
Filed: Nov. 06, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 06, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment be extended until December 11, 2017. This is Plaintiff's first request for an extension of time to respond. Plaintiff's counsel requires additional time to review and consider the government's position due to confl
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment be extended until December 11, 2017. This is Plaintiff's first request for an extension of time to respond. Plaintiff's counsel requires additional time to review and consider the government's position due to confli..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME
EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment be extended until December 11, 2017. This is Plaintiff's first request for an extension of time to respond. Plaintiff's counsel requires additional time to review and consider the government's position due to conflicting hearings scheduled near and around the original reply date. Defendant's counsel does not object and agrees that all subsequent deadlines should be accordingly extended.
ORDER
APPROVED AND SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
