Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Betten v. Berryhill, 2:18-cv-00536-KJD-NJK. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181207e85 Visitors: 11
Filed: Dec. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . The Court provides an extended briefing period to counsel in Social Security cases as a matter of course. See Docket No. 16 at 3-4. Pending before the Court is the Commissioner's unopposed motion to extend that briefing schedule by a whopping 45 additional days. Docket No. 23. The unopposed motion is premised on counsel being "out of the office unexpectedly," 1 and that counsel has other cases on which she is focussed. The Court is cognizant of t
More

ORDER

The Court provides an extended briefing period to counsel in Social Security cases as a matter of course. See Docket No. 16 at 3-4. Pending before the Court is the Commissioner's unopposed motion to extend that briefing schedule by a whopping 45 additional days. Docket No. 23. The unopposed motion is premised on counsel being "out of the office unexpectedly,"1 and that counsel has other cases on which she is focussed. The Court is cognizant of the difficulties in managing "competing workload demands," but it appears to have become a matter of routine for the Commissioner to point to such issues in seeking extensions.2 This issue needs to be rectified, as the Court will not continue to indulge such requests ad infinitum.

In the circumstances of this case, the Court will GRANT in part and DENY in part the unopposed motion. The deadline to respond to Plaintiff's motion to reverse or remand is EXTENDED by 30 days. As noted above, the Commissioner should not expect that the Court will grant future requests based on the apparent over-staffing of its attorneys. Within 7 days of the issuance of this order, counsel shall file a proof of service indicating that she has provided a copy of this order to Deborah Lee Stachel, Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The unopposed motion identifies neither the reason nor the duration of that absence.
2. To be clear, this is not an issue isolated to the attorney assigned to this case, and the Court is not impugning her through this order. Instead, this appears to be a common issue for the various attorneys who represent the Commissioner in this Court.
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