Free Order on Motion to Stay - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:07-cv-00702-TCW

Document 12

Filed 03/28/2008

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 07-702 C (Filed: March 28, 2008) ************************************ OK'S CASCADE COMPANY, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * * THE UNITED STATES, * * Defendant. * * ************************************ ORDER On November 23, 2007, December 26, 2007, and January 24, 2008, Defendant filed motions for enlargements of time, which the Court granted. In Defendant's second and third motions, Defendant cited exactly the same reason for requesting an enlargement: that "the parties have held discussions regarding the possibility of settlement and would like to continue to explore the possibility of settling this case before we file the answer." In its second motion, Defendant further stated that the enlargement was necessary because Plaintiff wanted to provide more information regarding its claims. In its third motion, Defendant stated that an enlargement was necessary because Defendant had requested additional information regarding Plaintiff's claims for purposes of settlement negotiations. In granting Defendant's third motion for an enlargement on January 31, 2008, the Court ordered Defendant to file its response to the complaint in sixty days, on or before March 28, 2008. The Court also ordered the parties, in the meantime, to file two joint status reports ­ the first by February 20, 2008 and the second by March 21, 2008. The Court specifically directed that each report was to include both an indication as to "whether a settlement agreement ha[d] been reached and . . . a list and description of all settlement activities" that had taken place in the case. If an agreement had not yet been reached, the March 21 status report was to "provide an indication of Defendant's readiness to respond" to the complaint. Despite the Court's detailed order, the next filing in this case arrived on March 26, 2008 ­ Defendant's present motion to stay proceedings. In other words, the parties ignored the Court's order to submit joint status reports on February 20, 2008, and March 21, 2008. In the present motion to stay, the parties have once again stated merely that they "have

Case 1:07-cv-00702-TCW

Document 12

Filed 03/28/2008

Page 2 of 2

held discussions regarding the possibility of settlement and would like to continue to explore the possibility of settling this case before the Government files the answer." Defendant notes that Plaintiff recently provided the additional information regarding its claims which Defendant had requested, and that staying the proceedings until June 26, 2008, will give the parties time to review this information and hold more discussions. Beyond Defendant's statements that the parties have held discussions regarding "the possibility" of settlement and that Plaintiff has provided information to Defendant, the Court is not aware of any further settlement activities that have been conducted, because no status reports were filed. Thus, because the Court has not been made aware of any significant progress toward settlement (e.g., that any settlement proposals were made) and because the parties have disobeyed the Court's previous order, the Court is not inclined to grant any further extensions of time for the parties to "continue to explore the possibility" of settling the case. Therefore, the Court DENIES Defendant's motion to stay proceedings. Defendant is ORDERED to respond to Plaintiff's complaint on or before April 25, 2008. The parties will be free to continue settlement negotiations in tandem with the progression of this case toward judgment.

s/ Edward J. Damich EDWARD J. DAMICH Chief Judge