Summary
rejecting the proposition that 2,756 jobs in California was not a significant number of jobs
Summary of this case from Hixon v. AstrueOpinion
1:08cv01737 DLB.
August 24, 2009
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (Document 15)
Plaintiff Angela M. Sandoval Cruz ("Plaintiff") filed the instant action on October 22, 2008. Plaintiff filed her opening brief in this matter on July 1, 2009.
On August 3, 2009, Defendant filed a motion for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's opening brief. Defendant seeks an extension up to and including September 2, 2009, due to a heavy workload and staffing shortages in the Commissioner's regional offices.
Defendant's counsel reportedly attempted to contact Plaintiff's attorney on August 3, 2009, to inform him of the request, but was unable to reach him. On August 21, 2009, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to inform that Court whether she opposed the motion for an extension of time. On August 21, 2009, Plaintiff responded to the Court's order and indicated that Plaintiff had no opposition to Defendant's motion for an extension of time. Accordingly, Defendant's motion for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's opening brief is GRANTED. Defendant SHALL file an opposition, if any, to Plaintiff's opening brief on or before September 2, 2009.
IT IS SO ORDERED.