Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 42.2 kB
Pages: 2
Date: August 31, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 314 Words, 2,095 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/17949/9.pdf

Download Scheduling Order - District Court of Federal Claims ( 42.2 kB)


Preview Scheduling Order - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:04-cv-00805-CFL

Document 9

Filed 08/31/2004

Page 1 of 2

In The United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 04-805C and No. 04-806C (Consolidated) (Filed: August 31, 2004) ************************************ ) ) STATESMAN II APARTMENTS, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ************************************ ************************************ ) ) BEACH HOUSE DEVELOPMENT CO., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ************************************
ORDER Based upon the Joint Status Reports submitted by the parties in both of the abovecaptioned cases, and for good cause shown, it is ORDERED that: 1. As the parties have proposed, the cases are consolidated for purposes of trial pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"). See 1

Case 1:04-cv-00805-CFL

Document 9

Filed 08/31/2004

Page 2 of 2

Franconia Assocs. v. United States, 61 Fed. Cl. 335 (2004); Cienega Gardens v. United States, __ Fed. Cl. __, 2004 WL ____________ (Aug. 31, 2004). For future filings, the parties shall use Statesman II as the lead case and shall refer to Nos. 04-805C and 04-806C (consolidated) in the caption. It will not be necessary otherwise to refer in the caption to the trailing case, Beach House Development Co. 2. Also as the parties have proposed, discovery and related proceedings in preparation for trial shall take place in accord with the following schedule: Activity Initial disclosures required by RCFC 26(a)(1) Defendant's motion for summary judgment on issues of liability Plaintiffs' response and any cross-motion Defendant's reply and response to any cross-motion Plaintiffs' reply in support of any cross-motions Deadline September 30, 2004

November 5, 2004 January 7, 2005

February 4, 2005 March 4, 2005

3.

Also as the parties have proposed, the court provides that the expert disclosures required by RCFC 26(a)(2) shall be deferred pending resolution of motions for summary judgment regarding issues of liability.

It is so ORDERED.

s/ Charles F. Lettow Charles F. Lettow Judge

2