From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

LIM v. ASTRUE

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 2, 2010
No. CIV S-10-958 KJM (E.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-958 KJM.

November 2, 2010


ORDER


Defendant has requested an extension of time to respond to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. No explanation is offered as to why the request has been made ex parte. See Local Rule 144(c). Accordingly, the request is denied without prejudice.

DATED: November 1, 2010.


Summaries of

LIM v. ASTRUE

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 2, 2010
No. CIV S-10-958 KJM (E.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2010)
Case details for

LIM v. ASTRUE

Case Details

Full title:NOEMI LIM, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

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

Date published: Nov 2, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-10-958 KJM (E.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2010)