Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01744/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01744-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Manuel Garcia
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

On August 28, 2015, the parties stipulated for an extension of the briefing schedule, requesting 

that the Court grant an extension of forty-five days for Plaintiff to file an opening brief. (Doc. 21) The 

Scheduling Order permits a single extension of thirty days by stipulation (Doc. 6 at 4), which was used 

by Defendant to file a certified administrative record. (Docs. 13, 14) In addition, Defendant sought a 

second extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s confidential letter brief. (Docs. 18-19)

Significantly, a scheduling order “is not a frivolous piece of paper, idly entered, which can be 

cavalierly disregarded without peril.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 610 (9th 

Cir. 1992). The deadlines are considered “firm, real and are to be taken seriously by parties and their 

counsel.” Shore v. Brown, 74 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1260, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94828 at *7 

(E.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2009). 

Here, Plaintiff reports that “Plaintiff’s counsel will be on vacation [from] August 29 through 

September 13, 2015, and Defendant has planned leave thereafter.” (Doc. 21 at 2) Therefore, Plaintiff 

MANUEL GARCIA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN COLVIN,

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01744 - JLT

ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

(Doc. 16)

Case 1:14-cv-01744-JLT Document 22 Filed 09/02/15 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

requests that the Court extend the filing deadline “from September 8, 2015 to October 23, 2015 for 

Plaintiff to file an Opening Brief, with all other dates in the Court’s Order extended accordingly.” (Id.

at 1) However, there is no explanation as to why Plaintiff needs until October 23, 2015 to file an 

opening brief, when his attorney will return from vacation on September 13, 2015. Presumably, the 

remainder of the extension is for Defendant’s counsel, who fails to provide any information regarding 

the duration of her leave and who has received two prior extensions of time in this action. Therefore, 

the Court finds Plaintiffs have not demonstrated good cause for the extension requested. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time is GRANTED in part; and

2. Plaintiff SHALL file his opening brief no later than October 9, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01744-JLT Document 22 Filed 09/02/15 Page 2 of 2