Free Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 40.2 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 20, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 453 Words, 2,789 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/19615/29.pdf

Download Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims ( 40.2 kB)


Preview Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:05-cv-00217-LAS

Document 29

Filed 12/20/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ARBITRAJE CASA DE CAMBIO, S.A. DE C.V., et al., Plaintiffs, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 05-217C Senior Judge Smith

UNITED STATES, Defendant.

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME Plaintiffs, Arbitraje Casa De Cambio, S.A. DE C.V., et al., ("Arbitraje"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time. One day before the Government's reply to Arbitraje's opposition to the Government's motion to dismiss was due, the Government requested a fourteen-day extension, until January 3, 2007, to file its reply. Arbitraje opposes this request because receiving the reply on January 3, 2007 will prejudice Arbitraje's ability to properly prepare for the oral argument in the case, which is scheduled for January 5, 2007 at 11 a.m. An extension until January 3, 2007 allows counsel for Arbitraje essentially one day to prepare for oral argument. Given that the Government's reply originally was due on October 31, 2006, allowing the Government to file its reply on the eve of oral argument is especially disconcerting. Arbitraje has reasonably consented to give the Government a seven-day extension, until December 27, 2006, to file its reply. However, this extension is deemed insufficient by the Government because its counsel indicates that she will be out of the office for the holidays from

Case 1:05-cv-00217-LAS

Document 29

Filed 12/20/2006

Page 2 of 3

December 25, 2006 through January 1, 2007. With all due respect to counsel, for the above reasons, this is not an appropriate reason for requesting, or for this Court to permit, a fourteenday extension. For these reasons, Arbitraje respectfully request that the Court deny the Government's motion for a fourteen-day extension of time to file its reply, and that the Court grant the Government at most a seven-day extension.

Respectfully submitted, s/ Howard Slavit Howard G. Slavit DC Bar No. 962886 SAUL EWING LLP 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W. Suite 1000 ­ The Watergate Washington, DC 20037-1922 (202) 333-8800 (tel.) (202) 337-6065 (fax) Dated: December 20, 2006 Counsel for Plaintiffs

2

Case 1:05-cv-00217-LAS

Document 29

Filed 12/20/2006

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 20th day of December 2006, I electronically filed the Plaintiffs' Motion In Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time, service of which will be electronically delivered to: Claudia Burke, Esquire Commercial Litigation Branch Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530

s/ Howard G. Slavit Attorney for Plaintiffs

3