Langston v. Berryhill, 1:18-cv-00273-SKO (SS). (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181128971
Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE OPENING BRIEF (Docs. 13, 14) SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . The Court is in receipt of the parties' "Stipulation to Extend Time to File Opening Brief" (the "Stipulation"). (Doc. 13.) Pursuant to the Court's order granting the parties' previous stipulation extending Plaintiff's time to file his Opening Brief, (Doc. 12), Plaintiff's Opening Brief was due November 20, 2018, the same day on which the parties filed the Stipulation. Requests for extension are
Summary: ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE OPENING BRIEF (Docs. 13, 14) SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . The Court is in receipt of the parties' "Stipulation to Extend Time to File Opening Brief" (the "Stipulation"). (Doc. 13.) Pursuant to the Court's order granting the parties' previous stipulation extending Plaintiff's time to file his Opening Brief, (Doc. 12), Plaintiff's Opening Brief was due November 20, 2018, the same day on which the parties filed the Stipulation. Requests for extension are g..
More
ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE OPENING BRIEF (Docs. 13, 14)
SHEILA K. OBERTO, Magistrate Judge.
The Court is in receipt of the parties' "Stipulation to Extend Time to File Opening Brief" (the "Stipulation"). (Doc. 13.) Pursuant to the Court's order granting the parties' previous stipulation extending Plaintiff's time to file his Opening Brief, (Doc. 12), Plaintiff's Opening Brief was due November 20, 2018, the same day on which the parties filed the Stipulation.
Requests for extension are governed by Rule 144 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court, Eastern District of California ("Local Rules"). Local Rule 144(d) explains that "[r]equests for Court-approved extensions brought on the required filing date for the pleading or other document are looked upon with disfavor." The parties are hereby admonished that any future requests for extensions of time shall be brought in advance of the required filing date and be supported by good cause under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). However, given Plaintiff's counsel's representations regarding her mother's health issues (see Doc. 13 at 2), and in view of the absence any appearance of bad faith or prejudice to Defendant, the Court GRANTS the Stipulation.1
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff has until December 26, 2018, to file his Opening Brief. All other dates in the Scheduling Order (Doc. 3) are modified accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The Court also notes that Plaintiff appears to have filed an identical stipulation on the docket also requesting an extension until December 26, 2018, to file his Opening Brief. (See Docs. 13, 14.) In view of the extension granted pursuant to the Stipulation, this redundant request (Doc. 14) is DENIED as moot.
Source: Leagle
