Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00937-LAS

Document 13

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OTOE-MISSOURIA TRIBE OF INDIANS, OKLAHOMA, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 06-937L Sr. Judge Loren A. Smith

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE ITS ANSWER OR 12(B) MOTION Pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"), Defendant United States of America respectfully submits this motion for an enlargement of time, to and including June 3, 2008, within which to file its Answer or 12(b) Motion pursuant to RCFC 8(b). Under the Court's scheduling order, dated March 3, 2008, the current filing deadline for Defendant's Answer is May 20, 2008. Defendant seeks two additional weeks based on the following: 1. Defendant needs additional time, to and including June 3, 2008, to file its Answer

or RCFC 12(b) Motion. It has not sought a prior enlargement to file its Answer or 12(b) Motion. 2. Defendant received the litigation report from its client agency, only on May 2,

2008, and it needs additional time review and analyze thoroughly the litigation report required under 28 U.S.C. § 520. 3. Counsel for Defendant have been and continue to be working diligently on the

draft Answer and 12(b) Motion papers, including conferring about, coordinating, researching, analyzing, preparing, and evaluating them with the relevant personnel of the United States

Case 1:06-cv-00937-LAS

Document 13

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 2 of 5

Departments of the Interior and of the Treasury. Given the complexity and significance of the issues involved in the Answer and 12(b) Motion, Defendant's counsel requires adequate time to complete their work; submit the draft motion papers to the appropriate officials and staffers at the Departments of Justice, the Interior, and the Treasury, for review; coordinate the reviews; incorporate and otherwise address any resulting comments; finalize the motion papers; and file them with the Court. In addition to working on the Answer and 12(b) Motion, one of Defendants' attorneys has been coordinating and continues to coordinate the 102 Tribal trust accounting and trust mismanagement cases that are currently pending in this Court, the United States District Courts in Oklahoma, and the United States District Courts in the District of Columbia. The other two attorneys involved in preparing the Answer and 12(b) Motion are working on eight other Tribal trust accounting and trust mismanagement cases. These situations apply as well to the attorneys in the Solicitor's Office of the Interior Department and the Chief Counsel's Office of the Financial Management Service of the Treasury Department, who are assigned to work on the 102 Tribal trust cases and who are responsible for coordinating with Defendants' counsel on the Answer and 12(b) Motion papers. In addition to the 102 Tribal trust cases, Defendants' counsel are also busy with work in other unrelated litigation. 4. Defendant is making similar motions in two other cases pending before this

Court, Tonkawa Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma v. United States, Case No. 06-938-BAF, and Seminole Nation of Oklahoma v. United States, Case No. 06-935 L, because the draft Answers and 12(b) Motions for those cases involve common issues. 5. Pursuant to RCFC 6.1, undersigned Defendant's counsel discussed the this

-2-

Case 1:06-cv-00937-LAS

Document 13

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 3 of 5

motion with Plaintiff's counsel, Kennis M. Bellmard, II, Sandra B. Harrison, and Jacquelyn Duffy of Andrews Davis, P.C., during a monthly conference call on May 19. During that call, among other items, Counsel exchanged and discussed the parties' respective views and positions relating to the deadlines of this case, Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma, and Seminole Nation of Oklahoma. Plaintiff's counsel indicated that they did not oppose this motion or either of the other motions. 6. Granting this unopposed motion will not cause any undue prejudice or harm to the

rights and interests of the parties herein. The parties in this case have been and continue to be in an informal settlement discussion process in an effort to resolve Plaintiff's issues and claims herein. Additionally, the granting of the motion will promote judicial efficiency and serve the public interest by enabling Defendant to submit well-researched, -analyzed, -briefed, and reviewed Answer or 12(b) Motion papers to the Court. At the same time, however, the denial of this unopposed motion would cause prejudice and harm to Defendant's position because Defendant would not have sufficient time to complete their preparation of the Answer and 12(b) Motion papers and undertake a full and thorough review of them with the client agencies before filing. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Court to grant its motion and allow it to and including June 3, 2008, within which to file its Answer or 12(b) Motion. Respectfully submitted this 19th day of May 2008,

Dated: May 19, 2008

Respectfully submitted,

-3-

Case 1:06-cv-00937-LAS

Document 13

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 4 of 5

RONALD J. TENPAS Assistant Attorney General

s/ Terry M. Petrie TERRY M. PETRIE Environment and Natural Resources Division U.S. Department of Justice 1961 Stout Street, 8th Floor Denver, CO 80294 Tel: (303) 844-1369 Fax: (303) 844-1350 [email protected] Attorney of Record for Defendant OF COUNSEL: ANTHONY P. HOANG JARED S. PETTINATO United States Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division P.O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044-0663 SHANI N. WALKER Office of the Solicitor United States Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 TERESA E. DAWSON Office of the Chief Counsel Financial Management Service United States Department of the Treasury Washington, D.C. 20227

-4-

Case 1:06-cv-00937-LAS

Document 13

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Motion for Enlargement of Time Within Which to File its Answer, and [Proposed] Order was served on May 19, 2008, by Electronic Case Filing, on the following counsel:

Kennis M. Bellmard, II Andrews Davis, P.C. 100 North Broadway Suite 3300 Oklahoma City, OK 73012 Counsel for Plaintiff

s/ Terry M. Petrie TERRY M. PETRIE

-5-