Free Status Report Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 22.4 kB
Pages: 2
Date: March 5, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 370 Words, 2,419 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/20011/42.pdf

Download Status Report Order - District Court of Federal Claims ( 22.4 kB)


Preview Status Report Order - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:05-cv-00582-MBH

Document 42

Filed 03/05/2008

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * AVTEL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Nos. 04-1574C, 05-582C Filed: March 5, 2008

KING AEROSPACE, INC.,

Defendant-Intervenor. * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ORDER The clerk's office received a motion to substitute counsel in the above-numbered cases on March 3, 2008, and forwarded the motion to chambers on March 5, 2008 for action. Chambers discovered that, though the cases had not been designated electronic cases, electronic inputs had been received from plaintiff and defendant on January 30, February 6, and February 22, 2008, on the docket of case no. 05-582C. Chambers received none of these filings, and only discovered these filings with the motion from defendant-intervenor, which was properly submitted not electronically but in hard copy format. The clerk's office shall file defendant-intervenor's motion, by leave of the court. Defendant-intervenor's motion to substitute Mr. Doke as counsel is GRANTED. The court has now accessed, for the first time, defendant's repeated motions for an enlargement of time, the last one, to and including March 7, 2008, within which to file a response to plaintiff's input to the court that continued protection of the opinion and administrative record in the above-numbered cases is unneeded, at least from the plaintiff's standpoint. Defendant's motion for an enlargement of time is GRANTED. Defendant shall coordinate with defendant-intervenor, and file a joint status report on whether the opinion and administrative record require continued protection and, if so, what portions of the record, the rationale for and the length of the proposed protection. One party may file the joint status report with the consent of the other party. Given the confusion described above, and to facilitate the filing of a joint status report, defendant and defendant-intervenor shall file their joint status report, responding to plaintiff's proposal, on or before Friday, March 21, 2008. Since case no. 05-582C has, apparently, been converted to the electronic format, the joint status report shall be filed electronically under case no. 05-582C. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Marian Blank Horn MARIAN BLANK HORN Judge

Case 1:05-cv-00582-MBH

Document 42

Filed 03/05/2008

Page 2 of 2

2