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

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 320

Filed 09/04/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS THE OSAGE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF OKLAHOMA, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________)

Electronically Filed: September 4, 2008 No. 99-550L (into which has been consolidated No. 00-169L) Judge Emily C. Hewitt

DEFENDANT'S FIRST MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO AMENDED MOTION TO INTERVENE Pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"), Defendant respectfully requests a two-week extension of time to respond to the Amended Motion for Leave to Intervene and Brief in Support ("Motion") filed by proposed intervenors Chris Hadlock, Jodell Heath, Linda Heskett, Cora Jean Jech, Anna Kay Price, George Tall Chief, and Julie Wilson ("Proposed Intervenors"). As grounds therefore, Defendant states as follows: 1. On August 11, 2008, the Proposed Intervenors filed their Motion in this matter,

seeking permission to intervene. The Court ordered that the parties respond to the Motion on or before September 8, 2008 and ordered the Proposed Intervenors to file their reply brief on or before September 22, 2008. 2. Defendant now requests a two-week extension of time, to September 22, 2008, for

it to file its response to the Motion. Furthermore, Defendant requests that the Court also extend Plaintiff's deadline to respond to the Motion to September 22, 2008, and that it extend the Proposed Intervenors' deadline to file their reply brief by two weeks, to October 6, 2008. 3. Defendant brings this request for the following reasons. The Proposed Intervenors'

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 320

Filed 09/04/2008

Page 2 of 4

Motion raises several complicated issues that Defendant must address in its response. For instance, the Proposed Intervenors do not just seek to intervene as individuals, but request that the Court allow them to intervene on a representative basis. (Amd. Mot. Intervene, at 11-12.) Furthermore, the Motion and attached proposed complaint raise issues regarding the relative rights of the plaintiff and the individual headright owners. (See, e.g., Ex. D, Amd Mot. Intervene). Also, given the potential for issues raised by this Motion to have overlap with another case, Fletcher v. United States (Case No. 02-CF-427) (N.D. Ok.), Defendant's counsel requires adequate time to appropriately complete coordination with assigned counsel for the government. 4. Counsel for the Defendants has been and continues to work diligently on formulating

a response to the Motion. However, given the complexity of the issues, and the possibility for overlap with other litigation both now and in the future, formulating Defendant's response has required and will continue to require a significant amount research and analysis, as well as conferring and coordinating with relevant personnel, not only within the United States Department of Justice but also within the Departments of the Interior and of the Treasury. 5. Furthermore, while it will be necessary to consult with the individuals within the

Solicitor's Office of the Department of Interior who have been assigned to this case and to obtain their review and comments of Defendant's response prior to its filing, these individuals are scheduled to attend an Indian Law Conference commencing September 8, 2008 and will be unavailable for such tasks while they are at the conference. 6. Finally, Defendant's counsel, as well as the attorneys in the Solicitor's Office of the

Department of Interior and the Chief Counsel's Office of the Financial Management Service of the Treasury Department, continue to juggle other work and work-related travel demands arising from -2-

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 320

Filed 09/04/2008

Page 3 of 4

the numerous Tribal trust accounting and trust mismanagement cases that are currently pending in this Court, the United States District Courts in Oklahoma and the District of Columbia. 7. Pursuant to RCFC 6.1, Defendant's counsel contacted Plaintiff's counsel Merrill

Godfrey by telephone on September 4, 2008 regarding Defendant's requested extension. Mr. Godfrey informed counsel that Plaintiff consented to proposed extension, as long as Plaintiff's deadline to respond to the Motion was likewise extended. Also on September 4, 2008, Defendant's counsel contacted Kenneth Crump, counsel for the Proposed Intervenors regarding Defendant's requested extension. Mr. Crump informed counsel that he needed to confer with his clients, and that he would attempt to provide his response, consenting or objecting to the requested extension of time by sometime on Friday, September 5, 2008. Defendant will file a supplement informing the Court of the Proposed Intervenors' response. 8. The granting of this unopposed motion will not prejudice the rights and interests of

the parties herein. Furthermore, it will not interfere with any deadlines scheduled in this case, particularly since the Court recently extended the deadlines related to Plaintiff's summary judgment motion as to damages by three months. 9. Additionally, the granting of the motion will promote judicial efficiency and serve

the public interest by enabling Defendant to submit a response which correctly sets forth the United States' position regarding the issues raised in the Motion. 10. Defendant has not previously requested an extension with regards to the Motion.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that the Court order that the responses of Plaintiff and Defendant to the Amended Motion to Intervene be due on or before September 22, 2008, and order that the Proposed Intervenors' reply brief be due October 6, 2008. -3-

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 320

Filed 09/04/2008

Page 4 of 4

Respectfully submitted this 4th day of September, 2008, RONALD J. TENPAS Acting Assistant Attorney General /s/ Maureen E. Rudolph MAUREEN E. RUDOLPH SD Bar #3176 ANTHONY P. HOANG, FL Bar #798193 ROMNEY PHILPOTT, CO Bar #35112 United States Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division P.O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044-0663 Tel. (202) 305-0479 Tel: (202) 305-0241 Tel: (202) 305-0247 Fax: (202) 353-2021 Attorneys for Defendant OF COUNSEL: ELISABETH BRANDON ERICKA THOMPSON HOLLY CLEMENT United States Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor Washington, D.C. 20240 TERESA E. DAWSON United States Department of the Treasury Financial Management Service Office of the Chief Counsel Washington, D.C. 20227

-4-