Opinion
2:19-cv-02390-JAM-JDP (SS)
12-08-2021
ROSEZETTA VIVIAN HUDSON, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING THE PARTIES' STIPULATED MOTION ECF No. 25
JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On November 27, 2019, plaintiff filed this lawsuit alleging that she has been disabled since November 9, 2014, and appealing defendant's denial of her Social Security claims. Due to the pandemic, this case was stayed for almost two years until August 26, 2021, when defendant filed the administrative transcript. On September 2, 2021, the court issued a new scheduling order. ECF No. 21. The order provided that plaintiff would have 45 days to file a motion for summary judgment. On October 12, the parties' filed a stipulation seeking an extension for plaintiff to file her motion. The court granted that request, allowing plaintiff until December 9 to file her motion. In that order, the court warned plaintiff that not further extensions would be granted absent “extraordinary circumstances.” ECF No. 24.
On December 7, the parties filed another stipulation seeking a second extension of an additional sixty days for plaintiff to file her motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 25. Notably, that stipulation misrepresents itself as plaintiffs “first” extension request and does not describe extraordinary circumstances such as might justify an extension. Id. This case is one of the oldest Social Security cases on this court's docket and the only one from 2019 that has not been briefed for court review. Counsel have not met their burden to show why it should be further delayed.
Accordingly,
1. The parties' joint stipulation, ECF No. 25, is construed as a motion and denied.
2. Plaintiff is directed to file her motion for summary judgment within seven days of the date of entry of this order.
3. Failure to comply with this order may result in sanctions against counsel.
IT IS SO ORDERED.