Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00608/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00608-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:402 Social Security Benefits

---

1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Charity Akin seeks judicial review of the administrative decision denying her application for 

Social Security benefits and filed her opening brief in the action on December 10, 2019. (Doc. 14) 

Pursuant to the terms of the Scheduling Order, the responsive brief will be due January 9, 2020. (See 

Doc. 6 at 2) On January 2, 2020, the Commissioner filed a stipulation of the parties for an extension of 

45 days to respond to the opening brief. (Doc. 15) 

The Scheduling Order allows for a single extension of thirty days by the stipulation of the 

parties, which has not yet been used by the parties. (Doc. 6 at 3) However, beyond the request for 

thirty days, “requests to modify [the scheduling] order must be made by written motion and will be 

granted only for good cause.” (Id. at 3) Accordingly, the Court construes the stipulation of the parties 

to be a motion for modification of the scheduling order. The Commissioner asserts the extension is 

necessary due to counsel’s workload. (Doc. 15 at 1) According to the Commissioner, “counsel has 

worked on approximately 15 district court cases, as well as a Ninth Circuit appeal,” since Plaintiff’s 

CHARITY AKIN,

 Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:19-cv-0608 - JLT 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF 45 

DAYS AND DIRECTING THE 

COMMISSIONER TO FILE A RESPONSE NO 

LATER THAN FEBRUARY 24, 2020

(Doc. 15)

Case 1:19-cv-00608-JLT Document 16 Filed 01/07/20 Page 1 of 2
2

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

opening brief was filed on December 10. (Id. at 1-2) The Commissioner contends the “[a]dditional 

time is required to review the record, to evaluate the numerous issues raised in Plaintiff’s brief, to 

determine whether options exist for settlement, and if not, to prepare Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s 

motion.” (Id. at 2) Plaintiff does not oppose the request, and it does not appear Plaintiff would suffer 

prejudice for the delay. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 

1. The request for an extension of 45 days (Doc. 15) is GRANTED; and

2. The Commissioner SHALL file a response to the opening brief no later than 

February 24, 2020; and

3. The Commissioner is advised no further extensions of time will be granted without the 

filing of a motion supported by exceptionally good cause.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 7, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00608-JLT Document 16 Filed 01/07/20 Page 2 of 2