Free Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:05-cv-00981-MMS

Document 33

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS K-CON BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 05-981C (Judge Sweeney)

DEFENDANT'S STATUS REPORT Defendant submits the following status report pursuant to the Court's May 16, 2007 order. Since defendant's last status report, submitted May 23, 2007, the parties have made the following progress in discovery: · Plaintiff's counsel inspected copies of non-privileged, responsive documents maintained by the United States Coast Guard (the "Coast Guard") in electronic form from June 6-8, 2007 in Washington D.C. · On June 15, 2007, plaintiff served its responses to Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Defendant has taken the

view that plaintiff's responses do not comply with the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"). The

parties' attempts to resolve the matter without court action have thus far not been fruitful. The defendant

therefore anticipates submitting a motion to compel additional discovery responses.

Case 1:05-cv-00981-MMS

Document 33

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 2 of 5

·

The parties agreed to exchange documents in this case on or before June 25, 2007, or as soon as practicable thereafter if their copy services were unable to meet that deadline. Defendant provided copies of the

documents it was to produce on June 25, 2007. Plaintiff's counsel informed defendant's counsel on July 12, 2007 that the documents to be produced by plaintiff had been shipped. · The parties have further agreed that plaintiff's counsel will review the non-privileged, responsive documents maintained by the Coast Guard in original hard-copy format from July 16-18, 2007 at the Coast Guard Facilities Design & Construction Center at 555 Robinhood Rd., Suite K, Norfolk, VA · 23513. The parties

Defendant has noticed four depositions.

currently are negotiating the dates those depositions will take place. In addition, the parties have conferred regarding a discovery schedule going forward in this matter. unable, however, to agree upon a schedule. They have been

The points of

departure between the parties are with respect to (i) when the first expert report will be due, (ii) whether rebuttal expert reports will be provided and (iii) the date for the close of

-2-

Case 1:05-cv-00981-MMS

Document 33

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 3 of 5

discovery.

The proposed discovery schedule of each of the

parties appears below: Event Plaintiff's Expert Report Due Defendant's Expert Report Due Plaintiff's Rebuttal Report Due Defendant's Rebuttal Report Due Close of Discovery Plaintiff's Proposal T1 + 30 T + 60 None None December 1, 2007 Defendant's Proposal August 3, 2007 September 3, 2007 October 3, 2007 November 2, 2007 March 1, 2007

We therefore request a status conference with the Court in order to determine a schedule for discovery, and a briefing schedule with respect to the motion to compel to be filed by defendants.

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director s/ Bryant G. Snee BRYANT G. SNEE Deputy Director

"T" means the date that defendant delivers copies of the documents reviewed by plaintiff in Norfolk July 16-18, 2007. -3-

1

Case 1:05-cv-00981-MMS

Document 33

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 4 of 5

s/ Robert E. Chandler ROBERT E. CHANDLER Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor, 1100 L St. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 514-4678 Fax: (202) 514-8624 July 13, 2007 Attorneys for Defendant

-4-

Case 1:05-cv-00981-MMS

Document 33

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on July 13, 2007, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S STATUS REPORT" 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/ Robert E. Chandler ROBERT E. CHANDLER