(SS) Chavez Jr v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2022 )

1 JODY M. PETERSON (SBN 326074) Attorney at Law 2 P. O. Box 7636 Chico, CA 95927 3 Telephone: (408) 805-5551 4 Attorney for Plaintiff Carlos Chavez, Jr. 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CARLOS CHAVEZ, JR., Case No. 2:22-CV-00490-DMC 11 12 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER, ON 13 V. PLANTIFF’S REQUEST TO EXTEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER FILED ON 14 C SOO CM IAM LIS SS EIO CN UE RR IT O YF , APRIL 12, 2022 (ECF No. 6) 15 16 Defendant, 17 18 19 Pursuant to Local Rule 143 the parties stipulate, that Plaintiff’s request to extend the 20 scheduling order filed on April 12, 2022, (ECF No.6) be granted as set forth in the local rule 21 22 144(d) (Fed.R.Civ.P.6). “The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial 23 phase of litigation.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) 24 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be 25 26 Law Office of Jody M. Peterson P. O. Box 7636 Chico, CA 95927 27 Page 1 Case No. 2:22-CV-00490-DMC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, ON PLANTIFF’S REQUEST TO EXTEND THE 28 SCHEDULING ORDER FILED ON APRIL 12, 2022 (ECF No. 6) 1 modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The 2 schedule may be modified ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party 3 seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th 4 Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607). 5 6 Good cause exists for this extension as Counsel for Plaintiff experienced a medical 7 emergency during pendency of this case and lacked the ability to comply with the April 12, 8 2022 (ECF No. 6) Scheduling Order. Thereafter, upon Counsel’s return to her office on July 9 25, 2022, Counsel was under the erroneous belief the request for extension had been filed as 10 the file appeared complete. Counsel was awaiting an amended scheduling order to be issued, 11 12 not realizing the pleading in the file was not endorsed, Counsel failed to comply with the July 13 29, 2022, deadline set forth in the Order. It is believed the medical issues that precluded 14 Plaintiff’s Counsel from performing by the prescribed time limit have been resolved and 15 Counsel respectfully request the Scheduling Order of April 12, 2022, be modified and an 16 Amended Order be issued. 17 18 There has been no previous request for extensions of time in this matter. It is noted that 19 Request for Court- approved extensions brought on the required filing date for the pleading or 20 other document are looked upon with disfavor. Local Rule 144 (d). 21 Now, therefore, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between all the parties to this 22 action as follows: 23 24 25 26 Law Office of Jody M. Peterson P. O. Box 7636 Chico, CA 95927 27 Page 2 Case No. 2:22-CV-00490-DMC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, ON PLANTIFF’S REQUEST TO EXTEND THE 28 SCHEDULING ORDER FILED ON APRIL 12, 2022 (ECF No. 6) 1 1. The scheduling order filed on April 12, 2022 (ECM doc 6) shall be 2 extended for 60 days, based on Plaintiff’s request to extend the Scheduling Order 3 and by agreement of the Parties. 4 2. Plaintiff’s request shall be granted and based on good cause and the Court 5 6 shall modify the April 12, 2022, Scheduling Order, and file an Amended 7 Scheduling Order as set forth in accordance with Local Rule 144 (Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 6) 9 10 SO STIPULATED: 11 12 Dated: August 2, 2022 13 By: _/S/JODY M. PETERSON 14 Jody M. Peterson 15 Attorney for Petitioner, Carlos Chavez Jr. 16 17 Dated: August 2, 2022 18 PHILLIP A. TALBERT 19 United States Attorney PETER THOMPSON 20 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX 21 Social Security Administration 22 By /s/ Elizabeth Landgraf ELIZABETH LANDGRAF 23 Special Assistant United States Attorney 24 Attorneys for Defendant 25 26 Law Office of Jody M. Peterson P. O. Box 7636 Chico, CA 95927 27 Page 3 Case No. 2:22-CV-00490-DMC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, ON PLANTIFF’S REQUEST TO EXTEND THE 28 SCHEDULING ORDER FILED ON APRIL 12, 2022 (ECF No. 6) eee EE SO II 1 ORDER 2 Based on the Joint Stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS SO ORDERED, the dates established in the scheduling order filed on April 12, 2022 4 5 (ECM doc 6) shall be extended for 60 days. 6 7 || Dated: August 3, 2022 Se DENNIS M. COTA 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Law Office of Jody M. Peterson P. O. Box 7636 Chico, CA 95927 07 Page 4 28 || SCHEDULING ORDER FILED ON APRII2.202(ECFN0.6)