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

Case 1:96-cv-00222-FMA

Document 116

Filed 01/13/2004

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS R.P. WALLACE, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 96-222C (Judge Allegra)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COURT'S DECEMBER 3, 2003 ORDER REQUESTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING Pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, defendant respectfully requests an enlargement of time of 35 days, to and including February 20, 2004, to respond to the Court's order, dated December 3, 2004, requesting supplemental briefing. Defendant's response is presently due on January 16, 2004. On January 9, 2004, Plaintiff's counsel, J. Hatcher Graham, indicated that plaintiff does not object to this motion, which is defendant's first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. The Court's December 3, 2003 order requests the parties to "identify legal authorities that might bear upon the Court's analysis of the extent to which the defective specifications caused the delay" in this case. For the reasons set forth below, the Government has determined additional time will be necessary for the Government to adequately prepare for and draft its response to the Court's order. First, although the Court's order requests primarily legal authority, the Government has determined that preparation of its response cannot be completed without current counsel conferring with certain agency personnel and Government witnesses and reviewing the testimony and exhibits presented to this Court during trial. This process is necessary, and has taken longer

Case 1:96-cv-00222-FMA

Document 116

Filed 01/13/2004

Page 2 of 3

than anticipated, in part, because the Government's supplemental brief is being prepared by a new attorney of record who is unfamiliar with the facts of this case and the record below. The Government's previous attorney of record, Michael Kiely, who was responsible for all aspects of preparing and trying this case, resigned from the Department of Justice in June 2003. The Government's current attorney of record, Kenneth S. Kessler, has not previously participated in any aspect of this case. In order to become familiar with the pertinent issues in this case, current Government counsel is presently reviewing the trial transcripts and exhibits, as well as consulting certain key Government witnesses. Second, the Government's preparations have been further curtailed because the contract with the Government's testifying delay expert, Mr. Steven Weathers, expired at the close of the 2003 calendar year. Presently, Government counsel is requesting authority to re-retain Mr. Weathers in 2004 because his services are deemed vital to analyzing and responding to the delay issues referenced by the Court's December 3, 2003 order. The Government believes that the requested 35-day enlargement of time will provide sufficient time for the new Government counsel to conclude his review of the trial transcripts and exhibits, confer with Government witnesses, and prepare and file the Government's supplemental brief in this case.

2

Case 1:96-cv-00222-FMA

Document 116

Filed 01/13/2004

Page 3 of 3

For the reasons set forth above, defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant this unopposed motion for an enlargement of time of 35 days, to and including February 20, 2004,1 in which to file a supplemental brief in response to the Court's December 3, 2004 order.

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/Deborah A. Bynum DEBORAH A. BYNUM Assistant Director OF COUNSEL ELLEN M. EVANS Department of the Navy Washington, DC 20374 s/Kenneth S. Kessler KENNETH S. KESSLER Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L St., NW, 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 305-7562 Facsimile: (202) 305-7643 Attorneys for Defendant

Date: January 12, 2004

The December 3, 2003 order directs the parties to file their briefs "simultaneously." For consistency's sake, and with the consent of both parties, we request that, if the Court grants this motion for an enlargement of time, plaintiff be awarded the same amount of additional time in which to file its supplemental brief.
1

3