Case 1:05-cv-00381-CFL
Document 25
Filed 09/27/2006
Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNTED STATES COURT OF FEDERA CLAIS
ARSAS GAME & FISH
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNTED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
No. 05-381 L
Judge Charles F. Lettow
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF FACT DISCOVERY
Defendant, UNTED STATES OF AMERICA, respectfully
moves for an enlargement of
time for fact discovery. On April 24, 2006, the paries jointly moved for an extension of fact
discovery. The Cour granted that joint motion on April
26, 2006, and ordered the deadline for
fact discovery to be extended from May i, 2006 to September i, 2006. On July 31, 2006, the
paries again jointly moved for an extension of
fact discovery. The Cour granted the joint
motion on August 2, 2006, and ordered the deadline for fact discovery to be extended until
October 2, 2006.
Due to certain developments in the case, which are listed below, Defendant respectfully
moves for a 32-day enlargement for fact discovery.
1.
Defendant noticed several depositions for the week of September 25, 2006, in
Little Rock, Arkansas. Due to scheduling conflicts, Plaintiff is unable to defend
all of these depositions durng the noticed times. Therefore, Plaintiff
requested
i
-
Case 1:05-cv-00381-CFL
Document 25
Filed 09/27/2006
Page 2 of 3
that some of the depositions be rescheduled for a later time. The only time
agreeable to both paries is durng the week of October 30, 2006, in Little Rock,
Arkansas. Plaintiff
has informed Defendant that it does not object to the
enlargement of fact discovery for the purose of takng these previously noticed
depositions.
2.
Defendant served a subpoena duces tecum for a fact witness, who is a former
employee of
Plaintiff, for a deposition on October 2,2006. Due to scheduling
conflicts, Plaintiff is unable to defend the deposition on that date. Although
Defendant conferred with Plaintiff about moving the October 2, 2006 deposition
to a later date, Plaintiff
has not definitively indicated its position on rescheduling.
this deposition. Thus, due to the impending fact discovery deadline, Defendant
seeks the Cour's approval to enlarge fact discovery.
3.
Other than those persons whose depositions have already been noticed or who
have been subpoenaed for a deposition, Defendant may wish to depose additional
persons who have yet to be noticed, durng the week of October 30, 2006, in Little
Rock, Arkansas. Plaintiff
has informed Defendant that it would like to limit the
extension of fact discovery to only those depositions that have already been
noticed. Defendant moves the Cour to allow for unlimited fact discovery until
November 2, 2006, as new information may come to light durng the impending
depositions.
2
-
Case 1:05-cv-00381-CFL
Document 25
Filed 09/27/2006
Page 3 of 3
Accordingly, Defendant moves the Cour to extend fact discovery by 32 days or up to and
including November 3, 2006.
Dated: September 27, 2006
SUE ELLEN WOOLDRIGE
Assistant Attorney General
United States Deparent of Justice
Environment and Natual Resources Division
Isl HelenAe Listerman
HELENAN LISTERM
Trial Attorney
Natual Resources Section
Environment and Natual Resources Division
United States Deparent of Justice
P.O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044 (202) 305-0239
Of Counsel:
Jennfer Dalton United States Corps of Engineers Little Rock Distrct Office of Counsel
3
-