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

Case 1:06-cv-00377-GWM

Document 26

Filed 07/09/2007

Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ROME RESEARCH CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 06-377C (Judge George W. Miller)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENTS OF TIME TO COMPLETE FACT DISCOVERY AND RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SECOND INTERROGATORIES, AND SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Pursuant to United States Court of Federal Claims Rule ("RCFC") 6.1, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests an enlargement of time of 17 days, from July 31, 2007, through and including August 17, 2007, for the parties to complete discovery in this action. We also request an enlargement of time

of 18 days, from July 9, 2007, through and including July 27, 2007, to serve our response to plaintiff's first requests for admissions, and second set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents. Plaintiff's counsel has indicated that No prior enlargement

plaintiff does not consent to this motion.

of time has been granted for any of these purposes, although the parties previously extended the fact discovery deadline from July 16, 2007 until July 31, 2007, pursuant to RCFC 29. Pursuant to this Court's order of May 15, 2007, the deadline to complete all discovery in this case is August 17, 2007. The

Case 1:06-cv-00377-GWM

Document 26

Filed 07/09/2007

Page 2 of 6

Court has indicated that there would be no extension of that deadline, except in the most compelling circumstances. Accordingly, the Government is not requesting an enlargement of

that deadline, nor will the proposed of enlargements affect that deadline or the trial schedule set forth in the May 15th order (trial is set to commence October 22, 2007). Among the grounds

for requesting enlargement of the subject deadlines is that the original agency counsel ­ who has been assigned to this matter from the beginning and who has been responsible for obtaining the documents and information necessary to respond to plaintiff's discovery requests ­ has been out of the office for surgery and, according to the agency, is not expected back until the week of July 16, 2007. In addition, plaintiff has served a significant amount of discovery in this matter. Specifically, plaintiff has served

three sets of interrogatories and three sets of document requests. Plaintiff also has served two sets of requests for

admissions and has notified us of its intention to conduct the depositions of at least five individuals. Our responses to plaintiff's second set of interrogatories and document requests, and plaintiff's first request for admissions, are due on Monday, July 9, 2007. Although we have

prepared drafts of the responses to plaintiff's requests for admission and second discovery requests, further work and

- 2 -

Case 1:06-cv-00377-GWM

Document 26

Filed 07/09/2007

Page 3 of 6

additional confirmation is required before those responses can be served. In an effort to avoid unnecessary delay, the agency recently assigned another attorney to assist on this matter, at least until the original agency counsel returns. However, the new

agency counsel still is becoming familiar with this matter. Because the original agency counsel has been absent, and for the additional reasons set forth below, we will be unable to respond to plaintiff's second discovery requests by the July 9, 2007 deadline. In addition, because there still is a great deal of discovery to be accomplished in a short period of time, an extension of the fact discovery deadline until August 17, 2007 ­ the current deadline to complete expert discovery and the overall discovery completion deadline ­ is warranted. prejudice plaintiff. This will not

The Government, and presumably plaintiff, Further, the only known

are not retaining any outside experts.

experts in this case are DCAA personnel, with whom plaintiff is familiar, and at least one of whom plaintiff has indicated it intends to depose. Finally, an enlargement of the fact discovery

until August 17 is necessary so that the Government will be able to conduct its own affirmative discovery and defend this action. In addition to the grounds discussed above, counsel of record for the Government is responsible for numerous other

- 3 -

Case 1:06-cv-00377-GWM

Document 26

Filed 07/09/2007

Page 4 of 6

matters that have required his attention in recent weeks, or will require his attention, including, but not limited to: (1) Blue Lake v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 01-570C (consolidated action) (continuing involvement with discovery and settlement issues); (2) Hooker v. United States, Fed. Claims No. 03-1501C (Government's expert report, initial trial exhibit list, and witness list served June 28, 2007; (3) John Snow, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-97C (opposition to summary judgment motion filed on June 29, 2007); (4) Oak Environmental Consultants, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 16-113C (Government's reply and opposition to plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment due July 9, 2007); (5) Friedman v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 05-1355 (Government's response to plaintiff's motion to reconsider, vacate and set aside order dismissing complaint due July 18, 2007); (6) Nguyen v. Secretary of Agriculture, CIT No. 06-138 (response to plaintiff's comments regarding Government's remand determination due July 23, 2007); and (7) Brooks v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 03-2470 (Government's response to plaintiff's motion for judgment upon the administrative record due July 25, 2007). The Government

understands that the issues in this case are relatively narrow. However, in light of the numerous other matters that require attention, and the short discovery period in this case, a brief

- 4 -

Case 1:06-cv-00377-GWM

Document 26

Filed 07/09/2007

Page 5 of 6

enlargement of time of 17 days to complete fact discovery is reasonable and necessary. CONCLUSION For these reasons, defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion for an enlargement of time, through and including July 27, 2007, to respond to plaintiff's second requests for production of documents, second set of interrogatories, and first requests for admission. We further

request that an enlargement of time until August 17, 2007, to complete fact discovery. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director s/Bryant G. Snee by PMM BRYANT G. SNEE 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) 305-7788 Attorneys for Defendant July 9, 2007 - 5 -

Case 1:06-cv-00377-GWM

Document 26

Filed 07/09/2007

Page 6 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that on this 9th day of July 2007, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO COMPLETE FACT DISCOVERY AND RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SECOND INTERROGATORIES, AND SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS" 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