Free Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 369

Filed 06/27/2005

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS PRECISION PINE & TIMBER, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 98-720C (Judge George W. Miller)

DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME REGARDING POST-TRIAL BRIEFING On June 24, 2005, plaintiff, Precision Pine & Timber, Inc. ("Precision Pine"), filed a motion to modify the post-trial schedule established three days earlier in the Court's June 21, 2005 order. The Court's order was the result of discussions between the parties and the Court at the close of trial. It provides over 2 months to prepare and file post-trial briefs and an additional 8 weeks to submit post-trial response briefs. See Order of Judge George W. Miller (June 21, 2005) (docket no. 365). The United States respectfully opposes Precision Pine's motion to modify this schedule for post-trial briefing.1 Precision Pine seeks to modify the current schedule because "co-counsel" has "a previous commitment" during the week of August 22, 2005. Mot. at 1. Precision Pine declines to identify the attorney or explain the nature of the commitment. Further, the schedule adopted by the Court is not aggressive. The absence of one of the attorneys assisting Mr. Saltman during one week does not constitute a burden warranting a change in the parties' mutually agreed schedule.

Precision Pine states that it "left a voicemail message raising this issue." See Mot. at 1. Undersigned counsel of record for the United States was out of the office for several days and did not receive the message until Monday, June 27, 2005. By that time, Precision Pine had already filed its motion.

1

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 369

Filed 06/27/2005

Page 2 of 3

Moreover, as explained during discussions at the close of trial, undersigned counsel's wife is pregnant and has a "due date" of September 1, 2005. The revised schedule would push the date for filing post-trial briefs past this date. Indeed, even before September 1, 2005, undersigned counsel may well be unavailable. Consequently, undersigned counsel is planning to have the Government's post-trial brief substantially complete before August 26, 2005. Precision Pine need only make the same sort of effort in order to comply with the schedule currently in place. Accordingly, the United States respectfully requests that the Court deny Precision Pine's motion for enlargement and make no changes to the current post-trial briefing schedule. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ Kathryn A. Bleecker KATHRYN A. BLEECKER Assistant Director

2

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 369

Filed 06/27/2005

Page 3 of 3

s/ David A. Harrington DAVID A. HARRINGTON Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 307-0277 Fax: (202) 307-0972 June 27, 2005 Attorneys for Defendant