Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:04-cv-00480-CCM

Document 9

Filed 05/24/2004

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS KIRA, INC, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 04-480C (Judge C. Miller)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME Pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests that this Court grant the Government an enlargement of time of 66 days, to and including July 29, 2004, for the purpose of responding to the compliant in this case. This is the Government's first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. Plaintiff's counsel has indicated that plaintiff does not oppose this request. This action arises out of a contract between plaintiff and the United States Air Force. Plaintiff's counsel has indicated that plaintiff will be filing an amended complaint incorporating new claims that were subject to separate proceedings before the contracting officer. Because plaintiff intends to file an amended complaint, it would not be in the interests of judicial economy for the Government to respond to the original complaint. The Government should be permitted to respond to the amended complaint instead. To properly respond the amended

Case 1:04-cv-00480-CCM

Document 9

Filed 05/24/2004

Page 2 of 5

complaint, the Government will be required to investigate the additional allegations and prepare a litigation report addressing those allegations. Further, in addition to this case, undersigned counsel is responsible for numerous matters that require his attention. Among other, counsel is responsible for the following: (1) Calvert v. Department of Veterans Affairs, Fed. Cir. No. 047075 (informal brief due May 26, 2004); (2) Formby v. Office of Personnel Management, Fed. Cir. No. 04-3195 (informal brief currently due on June 1, 2004); (3) Clark v. United States, Fed. Cir. No. 04-5077 (informal brief currently due June 4, 2004); (4) Henderson v. Department of Veterans Affairs, Fed. Cir. No. 04-7074 (informal brief due on June 4, 2004); (5) Paalan v. United States, Fed. Cir. No. 04-5043 (informal brief due on June 7, 2004); (6) Rice Services, Ltd. v. United States, Fed. Cir. No. 04-5069 (Government's principal brief will be due July 22, 2004, if previously-filed enlargement motion is granted) (7) MarshallCarter v. Department of Veterans Affairs, Fed. Cir. No. 04-3052 (Government's brief will be due August 5, 2004, if previously-filed enlargement motion is granted). In addition to the seven appellate briefs discussed above, defendant's counsel must prepare for oral argument in Hoska v. Department of Army, Fed. Cir. No. 03-3306. That argument is scheduled for July 7, 2004. Further, the -2-

Case 1:04-cv-00480-CCM

Document 9

Filed 05/24/2004

Page 3 of 5

Government's response to the complaint in CLR Timber Holdings, Inc. v. United States, No. 04-501C, currently is due May 28, 2004, although we will be seeking an enlargement of that deadline. Defendant's counsel also must file a response, on or before June 3, 2004, to the plaintiff's supplemental brief regarding the Government's motion to dismiss in Sodexho Marriott Management, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 99-765C. In addition, defendant's counsel is responsible for the consolidated actions in Blue Lake Forest Products, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 01-570C and Timber Products Co. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 01-627C. In connection with those matters, defendant's counsel is required to provide a substantial amount of court-ordered discovery between now and June 4, 2004. Defendant's counsel anticipates that discovery in those matters will require much of his time through at least June 4, 2004. He also has just been assigned Chenega Management v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 03-2789C. The discovery deadline in that case is July 6, 2004. Defendant's counsel will likely be required to participate in depositions for at least a week in New Mexico prior to the discovery cutoff in that case.

-3-

Case 1:04-cv-00480-CCM

Document 9

Filed 05/24/2004

Page 4 of 5

CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request an enlargement of time of 66 days to respond to plaintiff's complaint (or the amended compliant, when it is filed). Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ Brian M. Simkin BRIAN M. SIMKIN Assistant Director s/ Richard P. Schroeder RICHARD P. SCHROEDER Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit Eighth Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 353-7961 Attorneys for Respondent May 24, 2004

-4-

Case 1:04-cv-00480-CCM

Document 9

Filed 05/24/2004

Page 5 of 5

Certificate of Filing

I hereby certify that on May 24, 2004, a copy of foregoing DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME 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/ Richard P. Schroeder