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

Case 1:05-cv-01043-VJW

Document 67

Filed 07/24/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS JORGE A. DELPIN-APONTE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 05-1043C (Judge Wolski)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME, OUT OF TIME, TO FILE ANSWER Pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Rules of this Court, defendant requests an enlargement of time of 25 days, through and including July 24, 2007, within which to respond to the complaint. Our response was due on June 29, 2007. This is our first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. Plaintiffs' counsel indicated on July 19, 2007 that plaintiffs are not opposed to this motion. This request is necessary, and is filed out of time, because Government counsel recently recognized that we had overlooked that, although we filed an answer in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, no answer has been filed in the Court of Federal Claims, and in light of Rule 12(a)(2)(A) of the Rules of this Court, an answer was due within ten days of the Court's partial grant of defendant's motion to dismiss. See RCFC 12(a)(2)(A) (stating that an answer is due within ten days "if the court denies or partially denies or partially allows the motion). In the Court's order dated June 12, 2007, although the Court did not deny the Government's motion to dismiss in whole or in part, the Court did not rule upon the Government's motion to dismiss with respect to the statute of limitations. As a result, the answer was due on or before June 29, 2007. We regret this oversight. Plaintiffs are not prejudiced by this delay in filing an answer because: (1) the Government previously answered a virtually identical complaint filed in United States district court; (2) the Government's position has been made clear in its briefs related to the motion to

Case 1:05-cv-01043-VJW

Document 67

Filed 07/24/2007

Page 2 of 2

dismiss and motion for summary judgment; and (3) the course of litigation following the Court's denial of our summary judgment motion has not depended in any way upon the answer to the amended complaint.1 For these reasons, we respectfully request that the Court grant the Government an enlargement of 25 days, through and including July 24, 2007, within which to file its answer to the amended complaint. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director /s/ Mark A. Melnick MARK A. MELNICK Assistant Director /s/ Michael Dierberg MICHAEL DIERBERG Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Class. Unit, 8TH Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530

Of Counsel: DANIEL GARRY Attorney Law Department United States Postal Service 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW Washington, D.C. 20260 July 24, 2007

The parties are currently working together to schedule a deposition in accordance with the Court's June 12, 2002 order and the parties' June 14, 2007 joint status report. -2-

1