Perales v. Berryhill, 1:17-cv-01353-JLT. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180716747
Visitors: 16
Filed: Jul. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 13, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME (Doc. 17) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . The parties have stipulated for Plaintiff have an extension of time to file an opening brief. (Doc. 17) According to Plaintiff, the additional time is necessary because "counsel has been unwell and requires the rescheduling of some deadlines to properly address the issues." ( Id. at 1) Notably, the Scheduling Order permits a single thirty-day extension by the stipulation of parti
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME (Doc. 17) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . The parties have stipulated for Plaintiff have an extension of time to file an opening brief. (Doc. 17) According to Plaintiff, the additional time is necessary because "counsel has been unwell and requires the rescheduling of some deadlines to properly address the issues." ( Id. at 1) Notably, the Scheduling Order permits a single thirty-day extension by the stipulation of partie..
More
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME (Doc. 17)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
The parties have stipulated for Plaintiff have an extension of time to file an opening brief. (Doc. 17) According to Plaintiff, the additional time is necessary because "counsel has been unwell and requires the rescheduling of some deadlines to properly address the issues." (Id. at 1) Notably, the Scheduling Order permits a single thirty-day extension by the stipulation of parties (Doc. 6 at 4), and this is the first extension requested by either party. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
1. The request for an extension of time (Doc. 17) is GRANTED; and
2. Plaintiff SHALL file an opening brief on or before August 9, 2018.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
