Opinion
1:21-cv-00390-GSA
06-24-2022
TRENTON LYDDEL GABRIEL Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
GARY S. AUSTIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendant moves for an unopposed 35-day extension of time to August 4, 2022 to file a response to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment due to counsel's workload. This is Defendant's first extension.
When considering whether good cause exists to modify a scheduling order, courts consider the foreseeability of the impediment to meeting the deadline and the party's diligence in seeking the extension once it became apparent they could not meet the deadline. See Sharp v. Covenant Care LLC, 288 F.R.D. 465, 467 (S.D. Cal. 2012); Ordaz Gonzalez v. Cty. of Fresno, No. 1:18-CV-01558-BAM, 2020 WL 2539287, at *2 (E.D. Cal. May 19, 2020). The Court has the inherent power to manage its own docket to achieve an orderly and expeditious resolution of cases. Southern California Edison Co. v. Lynch, 307 F.3d 794 (9th Cir. 2002).
Counsel identified reasonably sufficient cause for the extension and sought it sufficiently in advance of the deadline.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant's deadline to file a response to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is extended to and including August 4, 2022. All other deadlines are adjusted accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.