Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:05-cv-01192-LJB

Document 8

Filed 03/07/2006

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 05-1192 C (Filed March 7, 2006) ********************* MICHAEL J. DONAHUE, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * * THE UNITED STATES, * * Defendant. * ********************* ORDER On March 3, 2006, the parties, pursuant to Appendix A, ¶ 4 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC) filed their joint preliminary status report (JPSR). Therein, the parties reported that they do not intend to file motions pursuant to RCFC 12(b) or 12(c) and, on January 5, 2006, plaintiff delivered a proposed settlement agreement to defendant which, if approved, would settle all issues except for the driving issue.1 Plaintiff states that if the settlement agreement is not approved by March 30, 2006, he intends to file a dispositive motion by May 1, 2006. Defendant reports that the government anticipates responding to plaintiff's proposed settlement agreement by March 30, 2006.

/ The parties propose to defer litigation of the driving time issue pending the outcome of the appeal of this issue in Stephen S. Adams v. United States, No. 90-162 and consolidated cases, appeal docketed, No. 06-5040 (Fed. Cir.), and also in James J. Aaron v. United States, No. 96-373, appeal docketed, No. 06-5041 (Fed. Cir.), a case which has been consolidated with Adams, No. 90-162.

1

Case 1:05-cv-01192-LJB

Document 8

Filed 03/07/2006

Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) Defendant is directed to respond to plaintiff's proposed settlement agreement on or before March 30, 2006.2 Absent the approval of the settlement agreement, plaintiff shall be allowed to FILE a dispositive motion on or before May 1, 2006.

(2)

s/Lynn J. Bush LYNN J. BUSH Judge

/ In the event that additional time beyond the March 30th response date is necessary, defendant shall submit a motion to the court in that regard on or before March 30, 2006. 2

2