Free Motion to Stay - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00345-EGB

Document 21

Filed 06/22/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS GRACE AND NAEEM UDDIN, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 06-345C (Senior Judge Bruggink)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY Defendant, the United States, respectfully requests that the Court stay discovery in this case pending its decision upon our pending motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On June 22, 2007, the United States filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and alleged that because plaintiff, Grace and Naeem Uddin, Inc. ("GNU"), failed to present its claims to the contracting officer for the damages sought, this Court does not possess jurisdiction to consider GNU's complaint. The timing and scope of discovery are matters solely committed to this Court's discretion. Florsheim Shoe Co. v. United States, 744 F.2d 787, 797 (Fed. Cir. 1984); Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC") 26. The suspension of discovery pending resolution of dispositive motions is appropraite in

Case 1:06-cv-00345-EGB

Document 21

Filed 06/22/2007

Page 2 of 4

those cases where the non-moving party is not disadvantaged by the suspension. Reliance Ins. Co. v. United States, 18 Cl. Ct. 359, 361 (1989). In other words, the Court has granted a stay of discovery in cases such as this one, unless it determines that discovery is necessary for the non-moving party to respond to the dispositive motion. Id.; Florida v. United States, 32 Fed. Cl. 668, 670 (1995) (citations omitted). In this case, the Government relies strictly upon GNU's complaint (including attachments) in asserting that the Court lacks jurisdiction. Therefore, discovery will not assist GNU in responding to the jurisdictional motion. For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that the Court stay discovery until it rules upon our motion to dismiss. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director

/s/ Franklin E. White, Jr. FRANKLIN E. WHITE, JR. Assistant Director

2

Case 1:06-cv-00345-EGB

Document 21

Filed 06/22/2007

Page 3 of 4

OF COUNSEL: MARK G. GARRETT United States Department of Agriculture Attorney-Advisor 14th and Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20250-1415 /s/ Armando A. Rodriguez-Feo ARMANDO A. RODRIGUEZ-FEO Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor, 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 307-3390 Fax: (202) 514-8624 Attorneys for Defendant June 22, 2007

3

Case 1:06-cv-00345-EGB

Document 21

Filed 06/22/2007

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on June 22, 2007, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY" 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/Armando Rodriguez-Feo