From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Espinoza v. Astrue

United States District Court, N.D. California
Feb 11, 2009
No C 07-3115 VRW (N.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2009)

Opinion

No C 07-3115 VRW.

February 11, 2009


ORDER


On February 9, 2009, the last day on which plaintiff Terri Espinoza could file a notice of appeal in the above-captioned case pursuant to FRAP 4(a)(1)(B), plaintiff, through counsel, moved to extend time to file a notice of appeal. Doc #19. The court may grant plaintiff's motion if she demonstrates good cause pursuant to FRAP 4(a)(5)(A)(ii).

Plaintiff submits that good cause exists because she needs additional time to find a lawyer to represent her on appeal. Doc #19. But plaintiff does not explain why her current counsel cannot or will not represent her on appeal. Accordingly, plaintiff or her current counsel are DIRECTED to explain IN WRITING why good cause exists in light of plaintiff's current representation by counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Espinoza v. Astrue

United States District Court, N.D. California
Feb 11, 2009
No C 07-3115 VRW (N.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2009)
Case details for

Espinoza v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:TERRI ESPINOZA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California

Date published: Feb 11, 2009

Citations

No C 07-3115 VRW (N.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2009)