Free Response - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv—01049;BNC Document 20 Filed 03/07/2005 P;ge1 0f3
0 (J , l
‘ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT l
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
............. , .......................___........._._______ .. __.__ X ¤
DENISE CORREA,
°""* ~'l TE¢ liliil
Plaintiff,
Civil Action `No. I ‘ ‘‘’_
v. 3:03CV1 O49( NC) = .
JOHN E. POTTER, POSTMASTER GENERAL,
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, AND
RON DEMAIDA March 4, 2005
Defendants.
............................_................,.................. X
DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO PLAlNTIFF'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE ISMISSAL l
Defendant, John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Posta Service,
objects to the Plaintiffs Motion to Set Aside Dismissal for the following reas ns.
Counsel for Plaintiff claims that he never received Defendant's Motio to Dismiss
filed on June 17, 2004, and only learned of it when the Court issued a Notic of
Dismissal on January 21, 2005. CounseI's assertions lack credibility given t e fact that
he was served with other filings which alerted him to the impending motion month
before it was filed.
The docket is a readily accessible public record. Had counsel consul ed it, it
would have confirmed that by letter dated May 13, 2004 (Document No. 14) the
Defendant requested the Courts permission to file a Motion to Dismiss in lie of
answering the complaint, and informed the Court that a letter was sent to co nsel dated
May 3, 2004 which outlined the grounds for the Defendant's proposed Motio to
Dismiss. On May 17, 2004, the Court granted the Defendant's request and rdered that
the Defendant file his motion on or before June 18, 2004 (Document No. 15 . Mr.
Pilgrim does not claim to have not received any of these documents alerting him about
Defendant's Motion and that it was required to be filed by June 18, 2004. 5
D
-


I """i""`“"l
i Case 3:03-cv—0104i I
1 In fact, as stated in the certification attached to Defendant’s Motion, laintiff’s E
attorney was served with the motion by mail on June 16, 2004 at the same ddress to
which Defendant mailed every other pleading. (See last page of Document No. 16).
Plaintiffs attorney asks this Court to believe that, despite receiving n tice from .
the Defendant that he intended to file a motion, and despite the Court’s ord r requiring
the Defendant to file his Motion by June 18, 2004, and having received no otion for
Enlargement with regard to this deadline, that he was taken by surprise sev n months
later when he learned a motion had been filed in the case. At the very Ieas given the
earlier filings which PIaintiff’s attorney does not claim to have not received, e was on _
inquiry notice to check the docket to see if, in fact, a Motion to Dismiss had een filed. \
The Defendant respectfully submits that the Plaintiffs motion is unfo nded, and i
requests the Motion be denied. Moreover, as set forth in Defendant's Motio , which is i
fully supported by an affidavit and documents, the civil complaint filed by Pl intiff's
counsel is inaccurate with regard to the claim that Plaintiff exhausted her ad inlstrative
remedies. Therefore, setting aside the dismissal would be fruitless.
I
Respectfully submitted, i
KEVIN J. O’CONNOR,
UNITED STATES ATTORN Y
ANNA V. CRAWF D
Special Assistant U.S. Attor ey
United States Postal Service
Northeast Area Law Office
8 Griffin Road North
Windsor, CT 06006-0170
Tel: 860-285-7309
Fax: 860-285-7397
Federal Bar No. ct 01394
A 2 ,
r
I
I R

I I itqn-w—W_*'
I Case 3:03-cv—0104?=|:iNC Document 20 Filed 03/OZ/@005 P' ge 3 of 3 I
. M ··333·
I ‘ ` CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I I
, I hereby certify that a copy of Agency's Objection to Plaintiffs Motion to Set {
Aside Dismissal was mailed by First Class Mail this 4"` day of March, 2005 or Y
Caleb M. Pilgrim, Esquire
1404 Whalley Avenue, 2"° Floor
New Haven, CT 06515
Carolyn lkari
Assistant U.S. Attorney
District of Connecticut
450 Main Street, Room 328
Hartford, CT 06103-3002 I
@1/Mw’r VM
Anna V. Crawford
I
I
3 I