Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01622/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01622-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME - 1:23-cv-01622-BAM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PHILLIP A. TALBERT

United States Attorney

MATHEW W. PILE, WSBA 32245

Associate General Counsel

Office of Program Litigation, Office 7

Social Security Administration

EDMUND DARCHER

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Office of the General Counsel

Social Security Administration

6401 Security Blvd.

Baltimore, MD 21235

Fax: (206) 615-2531

Email: edmund.darcher@ssa.gov

Telephone: (206) 615-2662

Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

JOHNNY JIMENEZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:23-cv-01622-BAM

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME 

Pending the Court’s approval, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the 

parties, through their respective counsel of record, that the time for Defendant to respond to 

Plaintiff’s Complaint be extended from January 12, 2024, up to and including March 18, 

2024. This is the Defendant’s first request for an extension. Defendant requests this extension 

because Defendant is still waiting on essential input from interagency components, including a 

pending declaration from an agency official familiar with the procedural history of Plaintiff’s 

Case 1:23-cv-01622-BAM Document 12 Filed 01/16/24 Page 1 of 3
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME - 1:23-cv-01622-BAM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

disability claims. Once that input arrives, Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s Complaint may 

need to undergo multiple internal reviews. Defendant therefore cannot respond to Plaintiff’s 

Complaint and asks the Court to approve this unopposed motion and extend the deadline to file a 

response to Plaintiff’s Complaint. Plaintiff does not oppose Defendant’s request for an extension 

of time. The parties further stipulate that the Court’s Scheduling Order shall be modified 

accordingly.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: Jan. 12, 2024 /s/ John Metsker*

(*as authorized via e-mail on Jan. 12, 2024)

JOHN METSKER

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: Jan. 12, 2024 PHILLIP A. TALBERT

United States Attorney

MATHEW W. PILE

Associate General Counsel

Social Security Administration

By: /s/ Edmund Darcher 

EDMUND DARCHER

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant

Case 1:23-cv-01622-BAM Document 12 Filed 01/16/24 Page 2 of 3
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME - 1:23-cv-01622-BAM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation and good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED that 

Defendant shall have an extension, up to and including March 18, 2024, to respond to Plaintiff’s 

Complaint. All others dates in the Court’s Scheduling Order (Doc. 5) shall be modified 

accordingly. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 16, 2024 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01622-BAM Document 12 Filed 01/16/24 Page 3 of 3