Free Order Staying Case - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:02-cv-00465-ECH

Document 54

Filed 03/22/2004

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 02-465 C (E-Filed: March 22, 2004) ________________________________ ) LA GLORIA OIL AND GAS ) COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) _______________________________ )

ORDER Further to the court's Show Cause Order dated February 20, 2004, the parties have responded, and defendant has filed a Motion for Leave to File Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause and Defendant's Reply. The Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause and Defendant's Reply (Defendant's Show Cause Surreply). Defendant states that this matter should be stayed pending the Federal Circuit's consideration of the interlocutory appeals of Tesoro Hawaii Corporation v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 65 (2003) and Hermes Consolidated, Incorporated v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 409 (2003),1 cases involving legal issues substantially similar to those presented in plaintiff's complaint in this matter. Defendant's Response to Show Cause Order at 1. In Defendant's Show Cause Surreply, defendant reiterates the economies of both judicial and the parties' litigation resources to be achieved by staying this case. Defendant's Show Cause Surreply at 2. Defendant also argues that "the very premise of La Gloria's argument (that its case­if ever tried­will be prejudiced by a decision in the Gold Line case) is flawed." Id. at 3.

1

The cases are consolidated on appeal under CAFC Case No. 04-5064.

Case 1:02-cv-00465-ECH

Document 54

Filed 03/22/2004

Page 2 of 2

Plaintiff urges the court to permit this case to proceed through discovery but not to trial during the pendency of the Federal Circuit's consideration. La Gloria's Response to Order to Show Cause (La Gloria's Resp.) at 1. Plaintiff argues that "if the parties are permitted to continue litigation uninterrupted, the case could be ready for trial in the spring of 2005. By that time, the Federal Circuit is likely to have issued its decision in Tesoro, and [the related case before this court] Gold Line also should be ready for trial." Id. at 2. Plaintiff's arguments rest on certain assumptions concerning the readiness of the related case Gold Line for trial, a desire to compare the damages model in this case with the damages model in Gold Line, and predictions about the timing of the issuance of the Federal Circuit's decision. See id. at 2-6. The court has carefully considered plaintiff's arguments and finds them unpersuasive. Accordingly, this case is STAYED pending the Federal Circuit's consideration of the interlocutory appeals in Tesoro Hawaii Corporation v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 65 (2003) and Hermes Consolidated, Incorporated v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 409 (2003). On or before fourteen days after the issuance of the Federal Circuit's decision, the parties shall file a joint status report with the court proposing further proceedings in this matter. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Emily C. Hewitt EMILY C. HEWITT Judge