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.

Donna Vance v. Michael J. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 11, 2012

DONNA VANCE,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (Docket No. 18) ORDER MODIFYING THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE (Docket No. 17)

On January 19, 2012, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order seeking an extension of time for Plaintiff to submit her confidential brief. (Doc. 15.) On January 23, 2012, the Court granted the parties' request for an extension of time and set forth a modified schedule. (Doc. 16.) In pertinent part, the Court ordered that "Plaintiff's opening brief shall be filed on or before May 1, 2012." (Doc. 16, 2:1.) Plaintiff did not file an opening brief by the Court-ordered deadline.

On May 4, 2012, three (3) days after Plaintiff's brief was due, Defendant's counsel filed a stipulation and proposed order for an extension of time. (Doc. 17.) The parties' stipulation did not acknowledge that the Court-ordered time to file had passed and did not explain why the parties failed to seek an extension of time until after the passing of the filing deadline. (See Doc. 17.) On May 7, 2012, the Court issued an order to show cause requiring the parties to show cause why a timely stipulation and request for an extension of time was not filed, and why sanctions should not be issued due to the parties' failure to comply with the Court's order and Local Rules. (Doc. 18.)

On May 8, 2012, the parties each filed responses to the Court's order to show cause. (Docs. 19, 20.) Defendant's counsel indicated that he had made a calendaring error and had mistakenly failed to respond to Plaintiff's confidential letter brief. (Doc. 20, pp. 1-2.) Defendant's counsel further indicated that he had modified his calendaring system in an attempt to prevent future oversights, did not act in bad faith, and did not intend to unnecessarily delay the proceedings or impose any hardship upon Plaintiff or the Court. (Doc. 20, p. 2.)

The Court is aware that in meeting deadlines, events sometimes conspire against even the most conscientious, experienced, and diligent practitioners. As such, the Court will discharge the order to show cause and will grant the parties' request for an extension of time to allow Plaintiff to file the opening brief. The Court expects that the parties will comply with the deadlines set forth below.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court's May 7, 2012, order to show cause is DISCHARGED;

2. Plaintiff's opening brief shall be filed on or before June 11, 2012;

3. Commissioner's responsive brief shall be filed on or before July 11, 2012; and

4. Plaintiff may file a reply brief on or before July 26, 2012.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120511

© 1992-2012 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.