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

Case 1:06-cv-00936-TCW

Document 24

Filed 09/15/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS _______________________________ UNITED KEETOOWAH BAND ) OF CHEROKEE INDIANS IN ) OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) _______________________________ )

No. 06- 936 L Judge Thomas C. Wheeler

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE ITS REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1500 Defendant hereby moves for an enlargement of time of ten days, from September 16, 2008 to, and including, September 26, 2008, in which to file its Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.1/ In support of this motion, Defendant states as follows: 1. Defendant's Reply brief is presently due to be filed on September 16, 2008; 2. The undersigned has just finished his draft of the Reply brief; 3. The draft has been e-mailed to agency counsel at Interior and Treasury; 4. The usual process for reviewing draft briefs in the Natural Resources Section (NRS) is review by the line attorney's supervisor after review by agency counsel. But the undersigned has just learned that the review process on this draft Reply will involve several additional reviewers within NRS; 5. The undersigned has also learned that after the review within NRS, there will, for this

The undersigned inadvertently re-filed the first motion for enlargement of time (filed originally in August, 2008) on September12, 2008.

1/

Case 1:06-cv-00936-TCW

Document 24

Filed 09/15/2008

Page 2 of 4

draft Reply, be additional review by several other DOJ attorneys; 6. Only after all comments/suggested changes have been received can the draft of the Reply brief be finalized; 7. Given the need for an adequate amount of time to permit both review of the draft Reply by agency counsel and for the internal DOJ review process (discussed above) to be completed, Defendant will need additional time to finalize and file its Reply brief; and 8. Plaintiff's counsel, James C. McMillin, has authorized the undersigned to state that the he does not oppose this motion. This is the second request for an enlargement of time to complete Defendant's Reply brief which the Defendant has made.

Dated this 15th day of September, 2008. Respectfully submitted, s/ James M. Upton JAMES M. UPTON U.S. Department of Justice Environment & Natural Resources Division Natural Resources Section P.O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044-0663 Ph. (202) 305-0482 Fax: (202) 353-2021 E-mail: [email protected]

Case 1:06-cv-00936-TCW

Document 24

Filed 09/15/2008

Page 3 of 4

2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 15, 2008, I electronically transmitted the foregoing DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION UNDER 28 U S.C. § 1500 to the Clerk of the Court using the ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Filing to the following ECF registrants:

James C. McMillin, Esq. [email protected]

Tamara S. Pullin, Esq. Tamara S. [email protected]

s/ James M. Upton James M. Upton

Case 1:06-cv-00936-TCW

Document 24

Filed 09/15/2008

Page 4 of 4