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

Case 1:06-cv-00233-BAF

Document 138

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS (FAM) 1, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 06-233C (Judge Futey)

DEFENDANT'S CONSENT MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION Defendant, the United States, respectfully requests that the Court grant an enlargement of time of 25 days, to and including Tuesday, June 17, 2008, within which to respond to plaintiffs' May 9, 2008 response to our cross-motion for summary judgment. Defendant's reply is currently due on Friday, May 23, 2008. This is defendant's first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. We request the enlargement because lead

counsel for defendant (1) was out of the office from May 8 through 13, 2008; (2) will defend depositions in Cebe Farms Industries v. United States, No. 05-965C (Fed. Cl.), on May 23, 2008; (3) must reply to a response to a motion for judgment upon the pleadings in White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. 99-961C (Fed. Cl.), by May 23, 2008; (4) must respond to a motion in limine in Information Systems & Networks Corp. v. United States, No. 06-99C (Fed. Cl.), by May 27, 2008; (5) will take a deposition in Information Systems & Networks

Case 1:06-cv-00233-BAF

Document 138

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 2 of 4

Corp. v. United States, No. 06-99C (Fed. Cl.), on June 3, 2008; and (6) will travel to Portland, Oregon, on June 4, 2008, for a June 5, 2008 oral argument in White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. 99-961C (Fed. Cl.), returning to the office on June 9, 2008. In addition, in view of the number of

plaintiffs in this case and the potential effect of this case upon the related Case No. 08-105C (Fed. Cl.), and upon Federal Air Marshals who are not plaintiffs in either case, it is important that the Government have the time necessary to coordinate its interagency response to plaintiffs' latest brief. Counsel for plaintiffs has represented to counsel for defendant that plaintiffs consent to this request. For the

foregoing reasons, the United States respectfully requests that the Court grant this consent motion for an enlargement of time. Because our reply is currently due on May 23, 2008, we respectfully request expedited consideration of this request. Respectfully submitted, GREGORY G. KATSAS Acting Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director

s/Bryant G. Snee BRYANT G. SNEE Deputy Director

2

Case 1:06-cv-00233-BAF

Document 138

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 3 of 4

s/Timothy P. McIlmail TIMOTHY P. MCILMAIL Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 616-0342 Facsimile: (202) 514-7965 OF COUNSEL: JANESSA GRADY FLEMING Senior Counsel, Litigation Office of the Chief Counsel Transportation Security Administration Arlington, VA May 19, 2008 Attorneys for Defendant

3

Case 1:06-cv-00233-BAF

Document 138

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on May 19, 2008, a copy of the foregoing Defendant's Consent Motion For An Extension Of Time To Reply To Plaintiffs' Response To Defendant's Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment, And Request For Expedited Consideration 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. the Court's system. s/Timothy P. McIlmail Parties may access this filing through