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.

Stacy Matthews v. Michael J. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 20, 2012

STACY MATTHEWS,
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 RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE (Doc. 17)

On July 16, 2012, Plaintiff Stacy Matthews, proceeding in propria persona, filed a notice regarding compliance with the Court's Scheduling Order. (Doc. 17.) Plaintiff indicated that she had contacted Defendant's counsel regarding an additional Joint Status Report she understands was due to be filed on July 13, 2012, but Defendant's counsel indicated he was not aware of any additional Joint Status Report that was required to be filed. (Doc. 17 ("I proceeded to call Mr. Roth and he informed me that he was in charge of the case but he couldn't find any information as to filing an additional Joint Status Report. I didn't know how to proceed at that point so I am writing this letter to inform the court that my attempts to file the Joint Status Report was unsuccessful.").)

On May 10, 2012, the Court had ordered a joint status report indicating whether Plaintiff had served a confidential letter brief on Defendant. (Doc. 11.) The parties filed a joint status report indicating that Plaintiff served her confidential letter brief on Defendant on May 16, 2012. Based on the date of service of Plaintiff's confidential letter brief, the Court provided the parties a revised scheduling order on May 22, 2012. (Doc. 15.)

The revised May 22, 2012, scheduling order provided a deadline for the parties to determine whether remand of this action was appropriate. If the parties agreed a remand was appropriate, the last day to file a "Joint Stipulation for Remand" was July 13, 2012. (Doc. 15, p. 3.) There is no mandatory requirement that the parties file such a stipulation on July 13, 2012, or report on the status of the parties' discussions to the Court if they have not agreed to remand the case to the agency. The deadline only requires the parties to determine whether the action is suitable for remand, not that the parties mustagree and stipulate to remand. It appears that no such agreement to remand has been reached in this case. Thus, the parties are not required to file a stipulation for remand. As such, Plaintiff's opening brief must be filed with the Court on or before July 30, 2012.

If Plaintiff requires additional time to file her opening brief, she may file a motion for an extension of time setting forth good cause (i.e., good reasons) why such an extension is necessary. However, any request for an extension of time should be filed before the July 30, 2012, deadline for filing the opening brief. In writing the opening brief, Plaintiff should review the Amended Informational Order issued on May 11, 2012, which discusses what should be included in an opening brief. (See Doc. 13.)

In sum, the parties are not required to file an additional Joint Status Report or a Joint Stipulation for Remand. The remaining deadlines are as follows:

Event Deadline

Plaintiff's Opening Brief: July 30, 2012 Defendant's Responsive Brief: September 4, 2012 Plaintiff's Optional Reply Brief: September 24, 2012

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120720

© 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.