Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:05-cv-00448-NBF

Document 67

Filed 01/30/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS RAYTHEON COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 05-448C (Judge Firestone)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF EXPERT WITNESS DISCOVERY SCHEDULE Pursuant to RCFC 6(b) and 6.1, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests that the Court enter an order granting an enlargement of time of three weeks of all of the remaining dates in the expert witness discovery schedule set forth in the Court's September 17, 2007 Order. We request the following modified schedule (for the Court's convenience, the current dates are set forth in brackets next to the requested dates): February 22, 2008 [February 1, 2008] Deadline for submission of replies to rebuttal expert reports Close of expert discovery Parties shall file a joint status report regarding the next steps in the litigation

March 28, 2008 [March 7, 2008] April 11, 2008 [March 21, 2008]

Absent the requested enlargements, the parties would be required to meet the schedule set forth in brackets above. See Order dated November 16, 2007. This is defendant's third request for an enlargement of time for this purpose, the Court having granted defendant's previous requests for enlargements totaling four weeks by Orders dated June 14, 2007 and November 16, 2007, and plaintiff's two unopposed requests for a total of approximately three months by Orders dated August 7 and September 17, 2007. On January 28, 2008, undersigned counsel for

Case 1:05-cv-00448-NBF

Document 67

Filed 01/30/2008

Page 2 of 4

defendant discussed this motion with Karen L. Manos, Esq., counsel for plaintiff Raytheon Company, who advised that plaintiff would not oppose this motion. The grounds for the motion are that, despite the Government's best efforts, it will not be possible to provide the Government expert's reply to plaintiff's expert's rebuttal report by the current due date (February 1, 2008). The three-week enlargement requested will provide a reasonable opportunity to complete the Government expert's reply and provide it to plaintiff. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that the Court enter an order granting the requested three-week enlargement and revising the expert witness discovery schedule as requested above. Respectfully submitted, JEFFREY S. BUCHOLTZ Acting Assistant Attorney General s/ Jeanne E. Davidson JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director

-2-

Case 1:05-cv-00448-NBF

Document 67

Filed 01/30/2008

Page 3 of 4

OF COUNSEL: LAWRENCE S. RABYNE Defense Contract Management Agency 1523 W. Central Road Arlington Heights, IL 60005-2451 Dated: January 30, 2008 s/ C. Coleman Bird C. COLEMAN BIRD Senior Trial Counsel Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: 202.307.0453 Facsimile: 202.514.7965 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant United States

-3-

Case 1:05-cv-00448-NBF

Document 67

Filed 01/30/2008

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on the 30th day of January, 2008, a copy of the foregoing Defendant's Unopposed Motion for an Enlargement of Expert Witness Discovery Schedule 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/ C. Coleman Bird