Perez v. Kijakazi

D. Nevada

Perez v. Kijakazi

DecidedMay 12, 2023

Docket2:22-cv-02014

StatusUnknown

This text of Perez v. Kijakazi (Perez v. Kijakazi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Perez v. Kijakazi, (D. Nev. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 YOLIE PEREZ, 6 Case No. 2:22-cv-02014 -NJK Plaintiff, 7 ORDER V. 8 [Docket No. 20] 9 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Defendant. 10 ll Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation for extension of time to file Plaintiff's 12] reply brief. Docket No. 20. 13 A request to extend a deadline set by the Federal Rules must be supported by a showing of 14], good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Plaintiff seeks a seven-day extension to file her reply brief in 15], support of her motion to remand. Docket No. 20 at 1. Plaintiff submits that this extension is 16], necessary because her counsel needs additional time to research the issues presented because of counsel’s “heavy hearing and briefing schedule.” Jd. at 1-2. “[A]ttesting that an attorney has 18] overloaded his work obligations such that he cannot comply with established deadlines is not only 19] an insufficient basis to modify case management deadlines, it is cause for alarm.” Williams v. 20] James River Grp. Inc, _F.Supp.3d___, 2022 WL 4181415, *4 (D. Nev. 2022) (internal citations 21] omitted). Plaintiffs submission, therefore, cannot constitute good cause to extend the deadline to file her reply brief. However, as a one-time courtesy to Plaintiff, the Court GRANTS the parties’ 23] stipulation for an extension of time to file Plaintiffs brief. Docket No. 20. Plaintiff must file her 24] reply brief no later than May 18, 2023. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: May 12, 2023 27 ZS FO Nancy JKoppe 28 United’States Magistrate Judge

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

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 YOLIE PEREZ, 6 Case No. 2:22-cv-02014 -NJK Plaintiff, 7 ORDER V. 8 [Docket No. 20] 9 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Defendant. 10 ll Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation for extension of time to file Plaintiff's 12] reply brief. Docket No. 20. 13 A request to extend a deadline set by the Federal Rules must be supported by a showing of 14], good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Plaintiff seeks a seven-day extension to file her reply brief in 15], support of her motion to remand. Docket No. 20 at 1. Plaintiff submits that this extension is 16], necessary because her counsel needs additional time to research the issues presented because of counsel’s “heavy hearing and briefing schedule.” Jd. at 1-2. “[A]ttesting that an attorney has 18] overloaded his work obligations such that he cannot comply with established deadlines is not only 19] an insufficient basis to modify case management deadlines, it is cause for alarm.” Williams v. 20] James River Grp. Inc, _F.Supp.3d___, 2022 WL 4181415, *4 (D. Nev. 2022) (internal citations 21] omitted). Plaintiffs submission, therefore, cannot constitute good cause to extend the deadline to file her reply brief. However, as a one-time courtesy to Plaintiff, the Court GRANTS the parties’ 23] stipulation for an extension of time to file Plaintiffs brief. Docket No. 20. Plaintiff must file her 24] reply brief no later than May 18, 2023. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: May 12, 2023 27 ZS FO Nancy JKoppe 28 United’States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Perez v. Kijakazi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-v-kijakazi-nvd-2023.