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


File Size: 27.8 kB
Pages: 4
Date: January 16, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 424 Words, 2,637 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/22312/21.pdf

Download Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims ( 27.8 kB)


Preview Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:07-cv-00379-LMB

Document 21

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ACC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 07-379C (Judge Baskir)

DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT Defendant, the United States, respectfully submits this response to plaintiff ACC Construction Company, Inc.'s ("ACC") request for oral argument. For the following reasons, defendant does not believe that oral argument is warranted with respect to the motion to transfer and motion to consolidate. In its request, ACC states that oral argument will allow it to "further explain the Plaintiff's intent and timing of its filing." ACC also states that oral argument will allow it to "explain the status and progress of the Board appeals." In its original motion to consolidate and its reply brief, ACC had an opportunity to explain its intent and the timing of the filing of its complaint in this Court. ACC also set forth the status and progress of the appeals before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Defendant fails to understand how oral argument will elicit any additional information

Case 1:07-cv-00379-LMB

Document 21

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 2 of 4

of value to the Court and, indeed, ACC does not specify what additional information it expects to provide and why that information needs to be provided through oral argument. In sum, ACC has not provided any persuasive basis for denying our motion to consolidate or for granting its motion to transfer and it fails to adequately explain why oral argument will assist the Court in deciding those motions.

2

Case 1:07-cv-00379-LMB

Document 21

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted, JEFFREY S. BUCHOLTZ Acting Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director /s Brian M. Simkin BRIAN M. SIMKIN Assistant Director /s L. Misha Preheim L. MISHA PREHEIM Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L St., NW Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 305-3087 Fax: (202) 305-1571 January 17, 2008 Attorneys for Defendant

3

Case 1:07-cv-00379-LMB

Document 21

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on this 17th day of January 2008, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT" was filed electronically. I understand that notice of this filing will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. The parties may access this filing through the Court's system.

s/ L. Misha Preheim