Kaszuba v. Kilolo Kijakazi

Opinion

KRIS K., Case No.: 3:20-cv-00515-AHG Plaintiff, ORDER:

v. (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE, and Commissioner of Social Security, (2) ISSUING AMENDED BRIEFING Defendant.

[ECF No. 21] Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Unopposed1 Motion for Continuance. ECF No. 21. Plaintiff seeks to extend upcoming filing deadline for his Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Remand (ECF No. 19) by ten days. Id. 1 Parties seeking to continue deadlines must demonstrate good cause. FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time”); Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that any request for continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause for the request”). “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[T]he focus of the inquiry is upon the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the inquiry should end.”) (internal citation omitted). A “party demonstrates good cause by acting diligently to meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. Swift Transp. Co., No. CV-16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 19, 2018). Defendant filed her Motion to Remand on July 8, 2022. ECF No. 19. The same day, the Court issued a briefing schedule, requiring that Plaintiff file his Opposition by July 22 and Defendant file her reply by July 29, setting a videoconference hearing for August 5. ECF No. 20. In the instant motion, Plaintiff represents to the Court that he had three medical appointments in the past week, which took up considerable time and limited his ability to prepare his opposition brief. ECF No. 21 at 1. Plaintiff notes that he has diligently searched the internet for analogous cases to inform his opposition brief, to no avail, and plans to visit the law library for help. Id. at 2. Further, Plaintiff represents that he requires the assistance of a caregiver to visit the San Diego Law Library and search its legal databases. Id. Thus, Plaintiff requests a ten-day continuance of his Opposition deadline, as well as the remaining dates set forth in the briefing schedule. Upon due consideration, and good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 21) as follows: / / 1. Plaintiff shall file his Opposition no later than August 5, 2022. 2. Defendant shall file her Reply no later than August 12, 2022. 3. A hearing on the Defendant’s Motion to Remand (ECF No. 19) will be held on August 19, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable Allison H. Goddard via videoconference. The Court will provide, via email, a Zoom link to the hearing participants two days before the hearing. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 21, 2022 AWioevdH. Kovlolard Honorable Allison H. Goddard United States Magistrate Judge