Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 132

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 1 of 3

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

Electronically Filed: January 26, 2006 Nos. 99-550L (into which has been consolidated No. 00-169 L) Judge Emily C. Hewitt

DEFENDANT'S MOTION OPPOSING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE DOCUMENTS AND TESTIMONY FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE COURT'S SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY ORDERS Defendant United States of America hereby responds in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Exclude Documents and Testimony for Violations of the Court's Scheduling and Discovery Orders ("Plaintiff's Motion"). Plaintiff seeks to exclude two supplemental expert reports authored by Defendant's designated experts Greg Chavarria and Ronnie Martin. Plaintiff also seeks to preclude use by the United States of certain documents which it claims were produced late (after the Court's September 1, 2005 close of discovery date). Plaintiff operates under the mistaken assumption that the burden lies with the United States to identify, locate, and provide copies to the Plaintiff, all relevant evidence necessary to support the prosecution of its claims at trial. This assumption has no support in either the discovery rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. From the inception of this litigation all documents and other evidence potentially relevant to the Plaintiff's claims in the possession, custody and control of the United States have been readily available for the Plaintiff's inspection and possession. Moreover, the United States has assisted the Plaintiff in its discovery efforts. The United States has faithfully adhered to its discovery obligations by supplementing its discovery when necessary. Plaintiff's meritless Motion should be denied because it is nothing more than a litigation tactic, and because the Defendant has fully complied with this Court's Scheduling and Discovery Orders. Defendant's Motion is more fully supported by its accompanying Memorandum of Points

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 132

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 2 of 3

and authorities. Respectfully submitted this 26th day of January, 2006, SUE ELLEN WOOLDRIDGE Assistant Attorney General s/ Brett D. Burton BRETT D. BURTON United States Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division P. O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044-0663 Telephone: (202) 305-0212 Fax: (202) 353-2021 Counsel of Record for Defendant s/ Martin J. LaLonde MARTIN J. LALONDE KEVIN WEBB United States Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division P. O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044-0663 Telephone: (202) 305-0247/0479 Fax: (202) 353-2021 Attorneys for Defendant OF COUNSEL: Elisabeth Brandon Brenda Riel Attorneys Office of the Solicitor Division of Indian Affairs U.S. Department of the Interior MS 6456 Washington, D. C. 20240 Telephone: (202) 208-7403 Fax: (202) 219-0559 Teresa E. Dawson Senior Counsel Office of Chief Counsel Financial Management Services U.S. Department of the Treasury 401 14th Street, S.W. Room 552A -2-

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 132

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 3 of 3

Washington, D.C. 20227 Telephone: (202) 874-2567 Fax: (202) 874-6627

-3-