Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Stevens v. Berryhill, 2:17-cv-02496-DMC (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180920971 Visitors: 9
Filed: Sep. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 19, 2018
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DENNIS M. COTA , 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 from September 18, 2018 to September 19, 2018. This is Defendant's fourth request for extension. Good cause exists to grant Defendant's request for extension. Counsel w
More

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

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 from September 18, 2018 to September 19, 2018. This is Defendant's fourth request for extension. Good cause exists to grant Defendant's request for extension. Counsel went to urgent care for a medical emergency on the date of the current filing deadline and was not able to finish Defendant's response. Defendant makes this request in good faith with no intention to unduly delay the proceedings. Counsel apologizes for the belated request, but made the request as soon as practicable. The parties further stipulate that the Court's Scheduling Order shall be modified accordingly.

ORDER

APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. FURTHER REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE A PARTY'S BRIEF SUBMITTED ON THE EVE OF THE DEADLINE WILL BE DISFAVORED UNLESS THE BRIEF IS FILED WITH THE REQUEST.

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