Cutchlow v. O'Malley

District Court, N.D. California·Decided May 9, 2025·No. 4:24-cv-07367·Unknown

Opinion

1 ] CAROLINE J. ALEGRE, SBN 271053 2601 San Pablo Avenue 3 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 698-1097 4 Facsimile: (510) 858-7867 ; Email: calegre@Whomelessactioncenter.org 6 oe Attorney for Plaintiff 7 8 11 12 ) ) Civil No. 4:24-cv-07367-HSG 13 Plaintiff, ) ) 14 Vv. ) STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR 15-DAY ) EXTENSION FOR PLAINTFF TO FILE 15 Acting Commissioner of Social ) REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF 16 Security. Defend REVERSAL OF DECISION OF THE ecurity, Detendant. , COMMISSIONER 17 )

18 19 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective 20 . . . . undersigned attorneys, and subject to this Court’s approval, that Plaintiff shall have an extension 21 of fifteen (15) days in which to file the Reply Brief in Support of Reversal of the Decision of the 22 24 Commissioner. Counsel for Defendant has no objection to the requested extension. Plaintiffs 24 filing is currently due May 9, 2025. The parties stipulate to extend this date until May 24, 2025. 25 Good Cause exists for Plaintiff's request. Plaintiff was diagnosed with metastatic cancer 26 less than two weeks ago, and this week, Plaintiff's Counsel received over 900 pages of new 27 08 medical evidence of diagnoses including squamous cell carcinoma and bone metastasis. A cursory review of the new evidence suggests it may be material, directly relating to evidence at

flaca Nin ADA mm: NII247 DCM

1 issue in this case, including Plaintiff's hearing testimony. Additional time is needed for 2 □□ . . . . Plaintiff's Counsel to review the new evidence prior to drafting her Reply, to assess whether 3 good cause exists to file a motion requesting incorporation of the evidence into the record, per 4 5 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Mayes v. Massanari, 276 F.3d 453, 463 (9th Cir. 2001) (quoting Key v. 6 Heckler, 754 F.2d 1545, 1551 (9th Cir. 1985) (“If new information surfaces after the Secretary's 7 final decision and the claimant could not have obtained that evidence at the time of the 8 administrative proceeding, the good cause requirement is satisfied.”’)). All other dates in the 9 19 { Court’s Scheduling Order shall be extended accordingly. 11 Respectfully submitted May 8, 2025. 13 14 By: /s/ Caroline J. Alegre CAROLINE J. ALEGRE 19 Homeless Action Center 16 Attorney for Plaintiff 17 By: /s/Lars J. Nelson 19 Office of the General Counsel, SSA Attorney for Defendant 20 (*as authorized by email) 21 23 24 } APPROVED AND SO ORDERED: 25 26 27 Dated: 5/9/2025 Aletyreed 3, bd, bh 38 HON. HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. United States District Court Judge

f\aca NIRn ADA OTWIAT DCM

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cutchlow v. O'Malley, (N.D. Cal. 2025).

Cutchlow v. O'Malley (Cutchlow v. O'Malley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Key v. Heckler
754 F.2d 1545 (Ninth Circuit, 1985)