Free Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00295-MMS

Document 42

Filed 05/28/2008

Page 1 of 1

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 06-295 C (Filed: May 28, 2008) ************************************* LAKELAND PARTNERS, L.L.C. * d/b/a LAKELAND NURSING HOME, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * * THE UNITED STATES * * Defendant. * ************************************* ORDER On May 19, 2008, the parties submitted several documents, including Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Proposed Findings of Uncontroverted Fact, and Counter Statement of Fact (document #38) and Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (document #39). The Clerk of the Court noted that, with respect to plaintiff's submission, an index to the exhibits, as required by RCFC 5.3(a)(1)(A), was missing. Because plaintiff's submission only contains two exhibits, the court finds that plaintiff's omission is harmless. The Clerk of the Court also noted that, with respect to defendant's submission, there is no provision for the filing of a counter-statement of facts with a motion not brought pursuant to RCFC 52.1. See RCFC 52.1(b) (requiring that a party opposing a motion based upon an administrative record include in any response a counter-statement of facts that draws upon and cites to the administrative record). Here, defendant bases its submission upon RCFC 56(h)(2), which requires that the party opposing a motion for summary judgment file a response to proposed findings of fact. See RCFC 56(h)(2). Since defendant moved for summary judgment and previously filed proposed findings of uncontroverted facts, its counter-statement of fact is unnecessary. Nevertheless, the court will permit defendant to file this document. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to file documents #38 and #39 by leave of the court. IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Margaret M. Sweeney MARGARET M. SWEENEY Judge