(SS) Huff v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 20211:20-cv-00821California359 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5 6 JARED WAYNE HUFF, CASE NUMBER: 1:20-cv-00821-GSA 7 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF v. DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE BRIEF DEADLINE KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Commissioner of Social Security,

11 Defendant.

13 The parties stipulate to a 30-day extension of time from September 30, 2021 to October 29, 2021 for Defendant to file a response brief because counsel was newly assigned to this case after the former counsel of record left the office. This is Defendant’s second extension in this case and the first for this deadline. The Scheduling Order allows for a single extension of thirty days by the stipulation of the parties. Doc. 7 at 3. Beyond the single extension by stipulation, “requests to modify [the scheduling] order must be made by written motion and will be granted only for good cause.” Id. When considering whether good cause exists to modify a scheduling order, courts consider the foreseeability of the impediment to meeting the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.