Free Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00815-CFL

Document 169

Filed 01/04/2007

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

ATWOOD-LEISMAN, an Idaho general partnership, et al., Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

98-815C (Judge Lettow)

PLAINTIFFS' STATUS REPORT UPON BEHALF OF BOTH PARTIES Pursuant to Rules 1, 6.1, and 7(b) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims and this Court's order dated November 21, 2006, plaintiffs, Atwood-Leisman, et al., upon behalf of themselves and defendant, the United States, respectfully file this status report regarding the status of the parties' settlement efforts. Counsel for the defendant has read this status report and consents to its content. On September 11, 2006, plaintiffs provided the Government with a formal offer of settlement. On September 20, 2006, the

United States Department of Agriculture provided the Department of Justice with a letter regarding its position upon plaintiffs' offer of settlement. The parties are now in the process of

negotiating the terms of a potential settlement agreement, which would obviate the need for further proceedings before this Court

Case 1:98-cv-00815-CFL

Document 169

Filed 01/04/2007

Page 2 of 5

and would result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice. With regard to terms of a potential settlement agreement, on September 22, 2006, counsel for the Government sent counsel for plaintiffs a draft, sample settlement agreement. On October 2,

2006, counsel for plaintiffs provided the Government with a revised, draft settlement agreement. Between October 6 and

October 26, 2006, agency counsel reviewed the proposed settlement agreement and provided counsel for the Department of Justice with substantial comments and recommended revisions. On November 9, 2006, counsel for the parties telephonically discussed and negotiated the language to be employed in the settlement agreement. In particular, the parties discussed the

scope of the settlement agreement and its relation to other pending cases involving the properties at issue in this case. addition, the parties discussed the need for, and extent to which, prior agreements entered into between the Government and plaintiffs were to be acknowledged and/or integrated in to the potential settlement of this case. On November 16, 2006, counsel In

for plaintiffs provided the Government with a revised proposed settlement agreement. On November 20, 2006, the parties, again,

telephonically discussed plaintiffs' revisions to the potential settlement agreement.

2

Case 1:98-cv-00815-CFL

Document 169

Filed 01/04/2007

Page 3 of 5

On November 22, 2006, counsel for plaintiffs forwarded its proposed revisions to the settlement agreement to counsel for the Government. After a teleconference, counsel for plaintiffs'

provided the Government with a revised settlement agreement on November 28, 2006. On December 6, 2006, the agency provided the

Department of Justice with its comments on the settlement agreement, and counsel for the Government forwarded a revised settlement agreement to counsel for plaintiffs. Thereafter, the On

parties participated in a teleconference on December 8, 2006. December 11, 2006, counsel for plaintiffs forwarded the Government a revised settlement agreement, to which the agency

provided comments to counsel for the Government on December 13, 2006. Several teleconferences were held between December 14 and

December 20, 2006 during which the language to be employed in the potential settlement agreement was finalized on December 22, 2006, with the agency's final comments and position received by counsel for the Government on December 27, 2006. At this time, the undersigned Government counsel is seeking the necessary settlement authority to accept plaintiffs' offer of settlement as memorialized in the latest version of the settlement agreement. It is anticipated by the parties that an

additional 30 days would allow time for counsel for the

3

Case 1:98-cv-00815-CFL

Document 169

Filed 01/04/2007

Page 4 of 5

Government to seek settlement authority, and for both parties to execute a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice. If a

potential settlement is not finalized, the parties propose that they file a joint status report with the Court by February 4, 2007 to apprise the Court of the status of the potential settlement.

/s/ Clayton Gill, Esq. C. CLAYTON GILL, Esq. Moffatt, Thomas, Barrett, Rock and Fields, Chartered 101 S. Capitol Blvd., 10th Floor Post Office Box 829 Boise, Idaho 83701 Attorney for Plaintiffs January 4, 2007

4

Case 1:98-cv-00815-CFL

Document 169

Filed 01/04/2007

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on January 4, 2007, with the consent of counsel for defendant, a copy of the foregoing "PLAINTIFFS' STATUS REPORT UPON BEHALF OF BOTH PARTIES" was filed electronically. I understand that notice of this of this filing

will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. the Court's system. Parties may access this filing through

/s/ C. Clayton Gill

5