Free Motion to Amend Schedule - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:95-cv-00650-LSM

Document 106

Filed 12/07/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ALFRED ALOISI, et al., Plaintiffs v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 95-650L Hon. Lawrence S. Margolis

JOINT MOTION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER On November 20, 2007, the Court issued a Scheduling Order, setting deadlines for filing a Joint Statement of Facts and a Joint Appendix (December 7, 2007), and for dispositive motions (December 21, 2007). Since that order was issued, the parties have prepared a draft Joint Statement of Facts and a draft Joint Appendix consisting of approximately 194 documents. The parties believe that it is in the best interest of the Court and in their best interest, to have more time to complete the Joint Statement of Facts and Joint Appendix so that they may make better use of these joint papers in their anticipated motions. The parties are, therefore, jointly proposing modifications to the current schedule, as set out in the attached proposed Scheduling Order. As the parties stated in their November 16, 2007 Joint Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order, while the parties contemplate filing a Joint Statement of Facts and a Joint Appendix of exhibits, they agree that neither side would be precluded from identifying additional facts or filing additional exhibits in support of their respective motions, although the parties will use their best efforts to minimize the number of additional exhibits each might file. Additionally, on November 30, 2007, Defendant filed a motion to compel the appearance at deposition of a Rule 30(b)(6) designee of both Energel, Inc. and Dynatech Corporation. Plaintiffs' response to that motion currently is due December 17, 2007. Defendant currently contemplates filing soon a motion to compel the appearance of Plaintiff James Kendle at

Case 1:95-cv-00650-LSM

Document 106

Filed 12/07/2007

Page 2 of 2

deposition. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request filing a joint response to both discovery motions on January 4, 2007 and Defendant agrees with that request. The proposed Scheduling Order attached, therefore, includes a due date for Plaintiffs' response to Defendant's discovery motions. Although this Joint Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order is being filed electronically by counsel for the United States, it was reviewed and approved by, and is being filed on behalf of, counsel for all parties to the case. Service is being accomplished through the electronic notification system of this Court. Dated: December 7, 2007 Respectfully submitted, RONALD J. TENPAS Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division s/ Bruce K. Trauben BRUCE K. TRAUBEN Natural Resources Section Environment and Natural Resources Division U. S. Department of Justice P. O. Box 663 Washington, D.C. 20044-0663 (202) 305-0238 (ph) (202) 305-0267 (fax) Attorney for Defendant

-2-