Free Motion for Partial Summary Judgment - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 19.3 kB
Pages: 3
Date: July 5, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 430 Words, 2,766 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/21045/12.pdf

Download Motion for Partial Summary Judgment - District Court of Federal Claims ( 19.3 kB)


Preview Motion for Partial Summary Judgment - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:06-cv-00141-LAS

Document 12

Filed 07/05/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

SHELL OIL COMPANY, UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, and TEXACO INC., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 06-CV-141 (Senior Judge Smith)

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO LIABILITY

Pursuant to RCFC 56, Plaintiffs Shell Oil Company, Union Oil Company of California, Atlantic Richfield Company, and Texaco Inc., by undersigned counsel, respectfully move for partial summary judgment as to liability against the United States. The grounds for the Plaintiffs' Motion are set forth in Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and in Support of their Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Liability, Plaintiffs' Appendix in Support of their Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Liability, and Plaintiffs' Proposed Findings of Uncontroverted Fact in Support of their CrossMotion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Liability, all filed on June 30, 2006. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court conduct oral argument on this Motion after the close of briefing at the Court's convenience. Plaintiffs originally filed this Motion on June 30, 2006 under the title "Plaintiffs' CrossMotion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Liability." On July 5, 2006, the Court's law clerk

Case 1:06-cv-00141-LAS

Document 12

Filed 07/05/2006

Page 2 of 3

informed Plaintiffs' counsel that Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment could not be considered a cross-motion because the Government had not moved for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Court's law clerk requested that Plaintiffs re-file the Motion without the word "Cross" in the title. July 5, 2006 Respectfully Submitted,

s/ Michael W. Kirk Michael W. Kirk Counsel of Record COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street, NW Suite 750 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax)

Of Counsel: Nicholas A. Oldham COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street, N.W. Suite 750 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax)

-2-

Case 1:06-cv-00141-LAS

Document 12

Filed 07/05/2006

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I certify that on July 5, 2006, the attached document was filed electronically. I understand that service is complete upon filing and that parties may access this filing through the Court's ECF system.

s/ Michael W. Kirk Michael W. Kirk Counsel of Record COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street, NW Suite 750 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax)

Of Counsel: Nicholas A. Oldham COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street, N.W. Suite 750 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax)

-3-