Free Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:05-cv-00956-CCM

Document 17

Filed 12/15/2005

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
****************************** DAVID S. and MALA A. LITMAN, Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. _________________________________________ ROBERT B. and MICHELLE S. DIENER, Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ****************************** ORDER 1. Further to plaintiffs' Notice filed on December 2, 2005, the Motion for Summary Judgment submitted by the Litmans on November 14, 2005, shall control on all common issues of fact and law addressed by that motion with regard to the Deiners' case, which issues plaintiffs represent are "identical." 2. Defendant filed Defendant the United States' Motion To Strike Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on November 29, 2005. Plaintiffs filed their opposition on December 13, 2005, and defendant's reply is due to be filed by December 27, 2005. As the court will not be available to rule on the motion until early January and defendant's response to plaintiff's refiled summary judgment motion is due on January 5, 2006, the court continues the date for defendant's response to plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment until a date set * * * * * No. 05-971T * * * * * No. 05-956T (Filed Dec. 15, 2005)

Case 1:05-cv-00956-CCM

Document 17

Filed 12/15/2005

Page 2 of 2

in the ruling that will issue on the motion to strike. Absent some new insight to be imparted in defendant's reply, however, it would appear that defendant would be expected to respond to plaintiff's summary judgment motion with a motion filed pursuant to RCFC 56(f). Therefore, although defendant has a de facto reprieve, defendant's response will be due within 20 days should its motion be denied, and defendant should be preparing to proceed according to rule if that eventuality transpires. 3. A copy of this order was transmitted to counsel this date by facsimile transmission.

s/ Christine O. C. Miller _________________________________________ Christine Odell Cook Miller Judge

2