Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 19.2 kB
Pages: 3
Date: November 15, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 416 Words, 2,684 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/20211/30.pdf

Download Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims ( 19.2 kB)


Preview Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:05-cv-00738-TCW

Document 30

Filed 11/15/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS __________ No. 05-738 T (Judge Wheeler) BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES & SUBSIDIARIES, Plaintiff v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant

MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

Defendant, the United States, moves for a six-day enlargement of time, from November 16 to November 22, 2006, to file its response to plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal. This is the second enlargement requested for this purpose, one prior enlargement of ten days having been previously allowed, and plaintiff's counsel has indicated that plaintiff does not oppose allowance of this motion. As good cause for allowance of this motion, the United States reports that it completed the discovery required to respond to plaintiff's motion within the time authorized by the Court and has completed drafting of an opposition to plaintiff's motion. However, at one of the two depositions taken on October 18, 2006, the deponent reserved the right to review and correct the transcripts of his deposition. The court reporter delivered the transcript to the deponent on November 1, 2006, but the deponent has yet to complete his review of the transcript, largely because his employer is in the process of relocating its corporate headquarters.

-1-

Case 1:05-cv-00738-TCW

Document 30

Filed 11/15/2006

Page 2 of 3

This timing is important because the United States intends to rely substantially upon that deposition testimony in its opposition papers. Thus, if the United States files those papers, and the deponent modifies his testimony during the review process (some modifications are expected), complications could arise and supplemental briefs might be required. Conversely, if the United States defers filing until after the deposition is reviewed, those problems would disappear. Under the circumstances, the United States believes that deferral is the best course and seeks the requested enlargement to allow it to defer filing until the deposition review process is completed.

-2-

Case 1:05-cv-00738-TCW

Document 30

Filed 11/15/2006

Page 3 of 3

Wherefore, the United States requests that the Court allow its motion for enlargement of time. Respectfully submitted,

s/ STUART J. BASSIN Attorney of Record U.S. Department of Justice Tax Division Court of Federal Claims Section Post Office Box 26 Ben Franklin Post Office Washington, D.C. 20044 (202) 307-6418 (202) 307-2504 (fax) EILEEN J. O'CONNOR Assistant Attorney General DAVID GUSTAFSON Chief, Court of Federal Claims Section JENNIFER D. SPRIGGS Senior Trial Attorney JACOB E. CHRISTIANSEN Trial Attorney November 15, 2006

-3-

2025866.1