Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

David L. Jackson v. Michael J. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 4, 2011

DAVID L. JACKSON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION OF IN PART

On March 31, 2010, this Court issued a Scheduling Order in this matter. In part, the Order provided that Plaintiff or Appellant David Jackson was to file and serve an opening brief within thirty (30) days of Defendant or Respondent's refusal to stipulate to a remand of the matter. (Doc. 6, ¶ 6.) In this case, following a November 29, 2010, Order to Show Cause that was eventually vacated, eventually Plaintiff's opening brief became due to be filed and served on or before January 3, 2011. (See Docs. 12 & 14.)

Plaintiff did not file an opening brief on January 3, 2011. Rather, on January 4, 2011, one day after the deadline, the parties filed a Stipulation requesting that the deadline for Plaintiff's opening brief be extended to February 2, 2011. The parties did not address the tardiness of their request or otherwise explain their delay. (Doc. 15.)

The parties are directed to Local Rule 144, which provides, in pertinent part:

(d) Time for Requesting Extensions. Counsel shall seek to obtain a necessary extension from the Court or from other counsel or parties in an action as soon as the need for an extension becomes apparent. Requests for Court-approved extensions brought on the required filing date for the pleading or other document are looked upon with disfavor.

The Court is concerned with the growing number of stipulations submitted by Plaintiff's attorney to extend time that are filed after the related deadlines, and is particularly troubled given an order to show cause has been previously issued in this case. Most troubling is that Plaintiff has failed to again, address the tardiness of the request. In the future, this Court will consider sanctioning any counsel who continue or persist in presenting stipulations or requests for an extension of time in this manner.

Here, the Court has considered the Stipulation filed January 4, 2011, and GRANTS it IN PART as follows:

1. Plaintiff shall file opening brief no later than January 18, 2011;

2. Thereafter, the remaining deadlines and due dates referenced in the Scheduling Order dated March 31, 2010 (see Doc. 7, ¶¶ 7-8), will remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

January 5, 2011

i70h38

/s/

20110104

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.