Free Response to Motion - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:05-cv-00010-JJF Document 26 Filed O9/22/2005 Paget of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
BRIAN MILLER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 05-()l()—JJF
v.
COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION,
Defendant.
DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR EXTENSION
Defendant, Computer Sciences Corporation ("CSC"), by and through its
undersigned counsel, hereby respectfully submits this response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Extension of the Deadline For Completion of Discovery, and states as follows:
l. In their Motion, Plaintiffs misrepresented CSC’s position regarding
Plaintiffs’ request for an additional one week to propound discovery. Plaintiffs attempt to
portray CSC as stubborn and unreasonable. In fact, the timing and nature of events was
reasonable and cooperative given the circumstances.
2. In its Scheduling Order, the Court generously allowed more than four
months for the completion of written discovery at the parties joint request.
3. On the final day on which Plaintiffs could propound written discovery,
Plaintiffs’ counsel called Sarah E. DiLuzio, local counsel for CSC, and left two voicemail
messages. Plaintiffs’ counsel stated that he had forgotten about the discovery deadline
and requested an extra week to serve discovery.

Case 1:05-cv-00010-JJF Document 26 Filed O9/22/2005 Page 2 of 4
4. Ms. DiLuzio was in Dover, Delaware for oral argument before the
Delaware Supreme Court when Plaintiffs’ counsel called and left the messages. She did
not receive Plaintiffs’ counsel’s phone messages until the early afternoon. As local
counsel in this matter, Ms. DiLuzio wanted to contact CSC’s lead attorney, Larry
Seegull, before responding to Plaintiffs’ request, and conveyed this plan to Plaintiffs’
counsel. Mr. Seegull was in Washington State on business, and Ms. DiLuzio had
difficulty getting in touch with him.
5. When Mr. Seegull was appraised of the situation, he felt compelled to
contact his client, CSC, prior to agreeing to Plaintiffs’ request, especially given that the
Court had allowed more than four months for the completion of written discovery, that
Plaintiffs waited until the last possible day to request an extension, and that Plaintiffs’
counsel did not seem to have any reasonable grounds for the delay.
6. Under the circumstances, CSC did not feel comfortable agreeing to a
modification of this Court’s Scheduling Order without the Court’s involvement. Thus,
CSC informed Plaintiffs that, while it would not stipulate to a one week extension, it
would not oppose Plaintiffs’ motion for a one week extension provided Plaintiffs have
reasonable grounds for seeking such an extension and provided that CSC is allowed an
equivalent amount of extra time to respond.
7. Although CSC still questions Plaintiffs’ grounds for seeking an extended
discovery deadline, CSC does not oppose Plaintiffs’ request for a one week extension S
provided that CSC is allowed an equivalent amount of extra time to respond to Plaintiffs’
belated discovery.
2

Case 1 :05-cv-00010-JJF Document 26 Filed O9/22/2005 Page 3 of 4
Respectfully submitted,
POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
Of Counsel:
Larry R. Seegull By; it rust I 3 ill . Q,
Linda M. Boyd ___s I Sarah E. DiLuzio (#4085)
DLA PIPER RUDNICK 1313 North Market Street
GRAY CARY US LLP P. O. Box 951
6225 Smith Avenue Wilmington, Delaware 19801
Baltimore, Maryland 21209 (302) 984-6279 (direct)
(410) 580-4253 (direct) (302) 658-1192 (fax)
(410) 580-3253 (fax) [email protected]
[email protected]
Counsel for Defendant
COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION
Dated: September 22, 2005
700420
3

Case 1:05-cv-00010-JJF Document 26 Filed O9/22/2005 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22nd day of September. 2005, the
foregoing DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
EXTENSION was hand delivered to the following attorney of record and was
electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF which will send
notification of such filing, to the following and the document is available for viewing and
downloading from CM/ECF:
BY HAND DELIVERY
Jeffrey K. Martin
Timothy J. Wilson
MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN
1509 Gilpin Avenue
Wilmington, DE 19806
if 1 ·* . ~ M
pn ,·~ gw- x {Lol , if , {,,//.{l»v¤¤ ’ "—;1-xi
_,/Sarah E. DiLuzio (#4085) "'i
I Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP
Hercules Plaza, Sixth Floor
1313 North Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19899-0951
(302) 984-6000 — Telephone
(302) 658-1192 — Facsimile
[email protected]
700420