Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00418-NBF

Document 12

Filed 07/19/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS HOH RIVER TIMBER COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 06-418C (Judge Firestone)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT Pursuant to United States Court of Federal Claims Rule 6.1, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests an enlargement of time of 60 days, from July 24, 2006, through and including September 22, 2006, to respond to plaintiff's amended complaint, filed July 6, 2006. to the proposed enlargement. Plaintiff's counsel has consented

This is our first request for an

enlargement of time for this purpose. In this case, plaintiff challenges a contracting officer's final decision imposing liability upon plaintiff due to its failure to comply with its contractual obligations. The contract

at issue has a lengthy history dating back to at least 1993. Prior to responding to the amended complaint, undersigned counsel of record must obtain and review the agency's litigation report, discuss the matter at length with agency counsel, investigate the applicable law and facts, prepare a draft response and submit the response for internal review. Given the

Case 1:06-cv-00418-NBF

Document 12

Filed 07/19/2006

Page 2 of 4

complexity of this case, undersigned counsel estimates that the Government will require an additional 60 days to prepare and finalize its response to the complaint. Further, in addition to this case, undersigned counsel of record is responsible for the following matters, among others, that will require his attention in the coming weeks: (1) Hicks v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 05-1058C (anticipates serving response to document request by July 21, 2006); (2) Tinsley v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-373C (Government's response to complaint due July 28, 2006); (3) Hooker v. United States, Fed. Cl. Nos. 03-1501C and 04-1126C (Government's motion for summary judgment due July 28, 2006); (4) Nguyen v. United States, CIT No. 06-138 (response to complaint due July 28, 2006); (5) Friedman v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 05-1355C (response to amended complaint and reply to plaintiff's opposition to Government's motion to dismiss expected to be filed on or before August 17, 2006; (6) China Processed Food Import & Export Co. v. United States, CIT No. 04-503 (Government's response to plaintiff's supplemental briefing due September 13, 2006); and (7) Oak Environmental Consultants, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-113 (Government's motion for summary judgment due September 15, 2006). Counsel is responsible for numerous other matters

that will require his attention as well.

- 2 -

Case 1:06-cv-00418-NBF

Document 12

Filed 07/19/2006

Page 3 of 4

CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant this motion for an enlargement of time, until September 22, 2006, for the Government to file its response to plaintiff's amended complaint. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/Kathryn A. Bleecker KATHRYN A. BLEECKER Assistant Director s/Richard P. Schroeder RICHARD P. SCHROEDER Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit Eighth Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 305-7562 Attorneys for Defendant July 19, 2006

- 3 -

Case 1:06-cv-00418-NBF

Document 12

Filed 07/19/2006

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that on this 19th day of July 2006, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT" 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. Parties may access this filing through the Court's system. s/Richard P. Schroeder