Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:04-cv-00461-BAF

Document 69

Filed 06/14/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 04-461C (Judge Futey)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME Defendant, the United States, respectfully requests the Court to grant a 1-day enlargement of time, from June 14, 2007, to and including June 15, 2007, within which to file our post trial brief. purpose. We have sought no prior enlargements for this

Plaintiff's counsel has indicated that plaintiff

opposes this motion. Since the conclusion of trial on May 3, 2005, defendant's counsel has been obligated by significant matters that prevented us from completing our post trial brief in the current time frame. Those obligations include a summary judgment brief in Geo

Seis v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 07-155C (May 4, 2007); an oral argument in Marshall v. Interior, Fed. Cir. No. 2006-1498 (May 10, 2007); an out-of-town summary judgment hearing in PCL v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 07-144 (May 18, 2007); a summary judgment reply brief in Geo Seis v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 07-155C (May 24, 2007); an evidentiary hearing in Geo Seis v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 07-155C (May 30, 2007); a summary judgment reply brief in GASA v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 01-

Case 1:04-cv-00461-BAF

Document 69

Filed 06/14/2007

Page 2 of 4

643 (June 1, 2007); and out of town discovery in Kiewit v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-796 (June 4-8, 2007), as well as numerous other case-related activities. Although we have diligently

attempted to complete the post trial brief in this case during the current time frame, we required an extra day to complete the brief. We do not request a commensurate enlargement of the post

trial reply briefs, due on June 28, 2007, and believe that our reply brief will be timely filed. In addition, and as indicated

to plaintiff's counsel, we will not access in any way the plaintiff's post trial brief prior to filing our own. The enlargement is necessary to facilitate the completion of the post trial brief, provide adequate time for supervisory approval, and to ensure that the post trial brief is thorough and of the most benefit to the Court. For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that our motion be granted. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director s/Bryant G. Snee BRYANT G. SNEE Assistant Director s/Brian S. Smith BRIAN S. SMITH Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch -2-

Case 1:04-cv-00461-BAF

Document 69

Filed 06/14/2007

Page 3 of 4

Civil Division Department of Justice Attention: Classification Unit 1100 L St. NW Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 616-0391 Attorneys for Defendant June 14, 2007

-3-

Case 1:04-cv-00461-BAF

Document 69

Filed 06/14/2007

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on June 14, 2007, a copy of foregoing "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR 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/Brian S. Smith