(SS) Edmon v. Commissioner of Social Security, 2:17-cv-0447-EFB. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180104970
Visitors: 2
Filed: Jan. 03, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 03, 2018
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for responding to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be extended for one business day from December 22, 2017 to December 26, 2017. This is Defendant's third request for extension. Good cause exists to grant Defend
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for responding to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be extended for one business day from December 22, 2017 to December 26, 2017. This is Defendant's third request for extension. Good cause exists to grant Defenda..
More
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for responding to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be extended for one business day from December 22, 2017 to December 26, 2017. This is Defendant's third request for extension. Good cause exists to grant Defendant's request for extension. Due to high workload demand and shortened staff, Counsel has over 60+ pending active social security matters that require two or more dispositive motions a week until mid-January. As a result, Counsel needs additional time in order to adequately assess the issues raised in Plaintiff's Motion. Counsel apologizes for the belated nature of the request, but did not expect to take additional leave, including on the date of the current filing deadline, due to unexpected family issues. The parties further stipulate that the Court's Scheduling Order shall be modified accordingly.
ORDER
APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. Accordingly, defendant's December 26, 2017 cross-motion for summary judgment is deemed timely filed.
Source: Leagle
