Opinion
No. 2:12-cv-2805-JAM-EFB PS
03-13-2013
STANLEY FINNEY, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
ORDER
This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). On February 11, 2013, defendant was served with a copy of the complaint herein; accordingly, its response to the complaint is due on March 13, 2012. See Dckt. No. 5; see also 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(C) ("Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the defendant shall serve an answer or otherwise plead to any complaint made under this subsection within thirty days after service upon the defendant of the pleading in which such complaint is made, unless the court otherwise directs for good cause shown."). However, on March 12, 2013, defendant filed an ex parte request for a 28-day extension of time to file a response to the complaint. Dckt. No. 13-1. Defense counsel states that he needs additional time to communicate with defendant and to prepare a dispositive motion. Id. at 1. Defense counsel attempted to obtain a stipulation from plaintiff pursuant to Local Rule 144(a), but plaintiff did not respond to defense counsel's communications. Id. at 2.
Defense counsel states that his office "received information that plaintiff is not at his address of record, but moved to California State Prison, Lancaster." Dckt. No. 13-1 at 2. Because plaintiff has not notified the court of any change in address, the court will not update plaintiff's address of record at this time. However, plaintiff is reminded of his obligation under Local Rule 182(f) to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Local Rule 182(f) further provides that "[a]bsent such notice, service of documents at the prior address of the attorney or pro se party shall be fully effective. Separate notice shall be filed and served on all parties in each action in which an appearance has been made."
In light of the representations made in defendant's request for an extension of time, which provide good cause for such an extension, the request will be granted. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 144(c) ("The Court may, in its discretion, grant an initial extension ex parte upon the affidavit of counsel that a stipulation extending time cannot reasonably be obtained, explaining the reasons why such a stipulation cannot be obtained and the reasons why the extension is necessary."); see also 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(C).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's request for an extension of time to file a response to plaintiff's complaint, Dckt. No. 13, is granted.
2. Defendant shall file a response to plaintiff's complaint on or before April 10, 2013.
3. The status (pretrial scheduling) conference currently set for April 17, 2013 is continued to August 28, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 8.
4. On or before August 14, 2013, the parties shall file status reports, as provided in the court's December 11, 2012 order.
5. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of this order on plaintiff at his address of record and at the following address:
Mr. Stanley Finney
H-19359, CSP-LAC
B5-206-L
P.O. Box 4490
Lancaster, CA 93539
____________
EDMUND F. BRENNAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE