Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00111-CCM

Document 5

Filed 04/12/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS JOHN DOE and JANE ROE for themselves and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 06-111C (Judge Christine O.C. Miller)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT Pursuant to Rules 6(b) and 6.1 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"), the United States respectfully requests an enlargement of time of 45 days, to and including June 1, 2006, to respond to the Doe plaintiffs' complaint. Pursuant to RCFC 6(e) and 12(a)(1), our response is currently due on April 17, 2006. This is defendant's first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. Counsel for defendant has discussed this motion with plaintiffs' counsel, and he indicated that he opposes this motion for enlargement. The United States requests this enlargement of time because counsel for defendant has not received the litigation report from the Department of the Army and does not expect to receive it for several weeks. Agency counsel has informed us that his office has not received all of the information concerning the allegations raised in the complaint from Army counsel assigned to the United States Forces Korea. Agency counsel also has informed us that he expects to receive this information within the next few weeks, and at that time he will be able to complete the litigation report. Once Government counsel does obtain the record from the agency, he will then need time to review it, prepare an appropriate response to the complaint, and have the response reviewed by his supervisors.

Case 1:06-cv-00111-CCM

Document 5

Filed 04/12/2006

Page 2 of 4

The United States believes this brief delay is warranted, given that the agency's task in gathering all of the information necessary for the United States to properly respond to plaintiffs' complaint is considerable. The plaintiffs purport to represent all Department of Defense ("DoD") civilian employees who were assigned to Korea during the time period that the curfew was in place, i.e., from September 24, 2004, until March 1, 2005. This comprises a potential class of approximately 4,000 DoD employees. Because the DoD employees were dispersed throughout the Republic of Korea, were employed by different DoD entities and fall under a range of employment classifications, the accurate collection of relevant information becomes extremely challenging. Moreover, there is no detailed administrative record in this case that would facilitate the drafting of the Government's response to plaintiffs' complaint. Eight DoD civilian employees1 from one DoD entity had requested arbitration through their union, the National Federation of Federal Employees ("NFFE"). The NFFE had agreed to arbitration scheduled for March 8, 2006, however, NFFE withdrew its grievance on February 22, 2006, and the arbitration was cancelled. Accordingly, no detailed record was developed for the eight named individuals who filed a grievance, much less for all DoD civilian employees present in Korea during the time period in question. For the foregoing reasons, defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant this request for an enlargement of time.

The Government has not been able to verify if the eight DoD civilians who sought, and then withdrew, from arbitration are the eight Doe plaintiffs in this litigation. 2

1

Case 1:06-cv-00111-CCM

Document 5

Filed 04/12/2006

Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director

s/Steven Gillingham STEVEN GILLINGHAM Assistant Director

OF COUNSEL: LT COL Michael Hokenson U.S. Army Litigation Division Civilian Personnel Branch Arlington, VA

s/Douglas K. Mickle DOUGLAS K. MICKLE Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit, 8th Floor 1100 L St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 307-0383 Fax: (202) 353-7988 Attorneys for Defendant

April 12, 2006

3

Case 1:06-cv-00111-CCM

Document 5

Filed 04/12/2006

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that on this 12th day of April 2006, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT," 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/Douglas K. Mickle Douglas K. Mickle

4