Free Response - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:07-cv-00195-MMS

Document 22

Filed 01/10/2008

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

) ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ______________________________)

DARRELL BOYE, et al.,

No. 07-195C (Judge Sweeney)

PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM RE: DEFENDANT'S "UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME"

COME NOW Plaintiffs and submit their Memorandum regarding Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time. The motion is for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs requested discovery served December 5, 2007. Defendant informs the court that it has arbitrarily limited Plaintiffs' requested discovery and that it intends, sometime in the future, to file a Motion For Protective Order to further limit its responses. Defendant acknowledges that upon receipt of the requested discovery it contacted Plaintiffs counsel. If, at the time, the parties, as Defense counsel represents discussed and could not agree on the scope of discovery, the Rule 26 Motion For Protective Over should have been filed. Plaintiffs object to this deliberate delay. In light of Defendant's limited response to requested discovery Plaintiffs are compelled not to oppose Defendant's request for extension of time and the commensurate extension of the discovery deadline. Plaintiffs request the court direct Defendant, to promptly respond to the discovery it does not dispute and to submit its' Motion For Protective Order detailing the factual and legal objections to the requested discovery and why it would not, at a

1

Case 1:07-cv-00195-MMS

Document 22

Filed 01/10/2008

Page 2 of 3

minimum, lead to discoverable evidence relevant to the Rule 12(B)(6) issues before the court. The primary issue in this case is why Plaintiffs are not being paid at the rate specifically stated in the subject contracts and mandated by the related federal regulation. During these entire proceedings Defendant has never stated why they do not mean what they plainly state. This imposes the additional burden on Plaintiffs to establish the Defendant United States interpretation and implementation of the provision and related regulation. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 9th day of January, 2008.

LAW OFFICES OF EDWARD D. FITZHUGH /s/ Edward D. Fitzhugh Edward Fitzhugh P.O. Box 24238 Tempe, Arizona 85288-4238 Attorney for Plaintiffs

2

Case 1:07-cv-00195-MMS

Document 22

Filed 01/10/2008

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF FILING

I hereby certify that on this 9th day of January, 2008, a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Memorandum RE: Defendant's "Unopposed Motion For Enlargement of Time" was filed electronically. I understand that notice of this filing will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. The parties may access this filing through the Court's system. /s/ Barbara K. Dean_________

3