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

Case 1:06-cv-00335-GWM

Document 7

Filed 06/23/2006

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
____________________________________ ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) JEFFREY H. NOKELL,

No. 06-335C Filed June 23, 2006

ORDER On June 22, 2006 defendant filed Defendant's Motion for a Stay of Proceedings or, Alternatively, for an Enlargement of Time to Respond to the Complaint. Defendant represented that this case is related to Bland, et al., v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 04-557C, Busigo, et al., v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 05-422C, Case v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 05-687C, Dupuis v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-82C, and Fleury v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-156, all of which have been stayed through and including July 14, 2006 to permit the parties to explore the possibility of engaging in Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR"). Defendant represented that plaintiff had agreed to engage in ADR in this case, and requested that the Court stay this case through and including July 14, 2006 to permit counsel for defendant to seek approval from the Department of Justice to engage in ADR. Alternatively, if the Court denied the motion for a stay, defendant requested a 18-day enlargement of time, from June 26, 2006 through and including July 14, 2006, to respond to the Complaint in this case. Defendant represented that plaintiff did not oppose Defendant's Motion for a Stay of Proceedings or, Alternatively, for an Enlargement of Time to Respond to the Complaint. Defendant's Motion for a Stay of Proceedings is GRANTED. The Court ORDERS that proceedings in this case be STAYED until Friday, July 14, 2006. The Court FURTHER ORDERS that if counsel for defendant obtains approval to engage in ADR, on or before Friday, July 14, 2006, the parties shall file a notice with the Court of their intent to pursue ADR pursuant to Appendix H, Section 3 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims. If counsel for defendant does not obtain approval to engage in ADR, the parties shall submit an additional joint status report on or before Friday, July 14, 2006 advising the Court of the status of counsel for defendant's efforts to obtain approval to engage in ADR and setting forth each party's position with respect to the nature and timing of further proceedings in this case.

Case 1:06-cv-00335-GWM

Document 7

Filed 06/23/2006

Page 2 of 2

Having granted Defendant's Motion for a Stay of Proceedings, defendant's alternative Motion for an Enlargement of Time to Respond to the Complaint is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ George W. Miller GEORGE W. MILLER Judge

-2-