From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Francione v. Kijakazi

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Apr 3, 2023
1:23-cv-00344-BAM (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2023)

Opinion

1:23-cv-00344-BAM

04-03-2023

PABLO CARACENI FRANCIONE, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

PHILIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney Eastern District of California MATHEW W. PILE Associate General Counsel CASPAR CHAN Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant


PHILIP A. TALBERT

United States Attorney

Eastern District of California

MATHEW W. PILE

Associate General Counsel

CASPAR CHAN

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; ORDER

BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Defendant, Kilolo Kijakazi, Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner), hereby moves for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint in this case. In support of this request, the Commissioner respectfully states as follows:

1. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on March 8, 2023 (Doc. No. 1). The docket reflects that summons was issued on March 10, 2023, with the Commissioner's response due within 60 days (May 9, 2023) (Doc. No. 5). The docket also indicates that the Commissioner's response shall be due on May 22, 2023 (Doc. No. 10).

2. Defendant has not previously received an extension of the deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint.

3. The federal rules for social security cases require identifying designations to be included in the complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. SUPP SS 2. This is generally satisfied by including a claimant's social security number. Prior to the filing of this motion, the Commissioner was unable to begin the process of evaluating Plaintiff's case because the Complaint did not identify a social security number. The Commissioner was also unable to locate Plaintiff's record based on his name.

4. On March 29, 2023, counsel for the Commissioner called and left a message for Plaintiff requesting that he provide identifying information for the Commissioner to begin the process of responding to his Complaint.

5. On March 30, 2023, Plaintiff returned counsel's call. Plaintiff provided the requested information for the Commissioner to begin evaluating Plaintiff's Complaint. Counsel also explained to Plaintiff that additional time would be necessary to respond to his Complaint because the Commissioner did not previously have the necessary information. Counsel inquired whether Plaintiff would have any objection to an extension to June 22, 2023, for the Commissioner to respond to his Complaint. Plaintiff advised that he had no objection to an extension

6. This request is made in good faith and is not intended to unduly delay the proceedings in this matter.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests until June 22, 2022, respond to Plaintiff's Complaint.

Respectfully submitted, ORDER

Pursuant to Defendant's request and good cause appearing, Defendant shall respond to Plaintiff's complaint on or before June 22, 2023.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Francione v. Kijakazi

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Apr 3, 2023
1:23-cv-00344-BAM (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2023)
Case details for

Francione v. Kijakazi

Case Details

Full title:PABLO CARACENI FRANCIONE, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Apr 3, 2023

Citations

1:23-cv-00344-BAM (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2023)