Opinion
21-cv-02104-JCS
09-23-2021
E.E., Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME RE: DKT. NO. 19
JOSEPH C. SPERO Chief Magistrate Judge
The Court has previously admonished the parties in this case that under this district's local rules, unopposed requests for extension of time should be filed as stipulations rather than motions. Dkt. 14 (citing Civ. L.R. 6-2, 6-3). That rule aids judicial efficiency by drawing a clear distinction between opposed and unopposed requests, and ensures that purportedly unopposed requests in fact have both parties' consent. See Civ. L.R. 7-12 (requiring stipulations to bear signatures of all affected parties); Civ. L.R. 5-1(i)(3) (requiring the filer's attestation of consent by any other parties whose signatures appear on electronically filed documents).
Plaintiffs purportedly unopposed motion for an extension of time (dkt. 19) is DENIED without prejudice for failure to comply with that previous order and applicable local rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.