Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:00-cv-00129-FMA

Document 81

Filed 12/07/2004

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 00-129C (Judge Allegra)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME Defendant, the United States, respectfully requests the Court to grant an enlargement of time of 64 days, to and including February 11, 2005, to file defendant's reply in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment. This reply is currently due on December 9, 2004. This is the Government's first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. Counsel for plaintiff advised that he does not oppose this motion.1 We respectfully request this enlargement of time because counsel for the Government has other commitments that require a substantial amount of her time, and which are affecting her schedule since plaintiff filed its opposition to our cross-motion on November 22, 2004. In particular, counsel was required to file a brief on November 26, 2004, in Smith v. Department of the Treasury, No. 04-3455 (Fed. Cir.). In addition, counsel was required to prepare for an oral argument on cross-motions for summary judgment in SAB Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. 02-1952C (Fed. Cl.), on December 6, 2004. Counsel is also required to file a brief in Four Points by Sheraton v. United States, No. 04-1589C (Fed. Cl.), a bid protest proceeding, on December 15, 2004, a post-trial brief in New Valley Corp. v. United States, No. 94-785C (Fed. We regret that this motion was not filed sooner. Although we contacted counsel for plaintiff on December 1, 2004, regarding this request, the plaintiff was not available to give its consent until December 6, 2004.
1

Case 1:00-cv-00129-FMA

Document 81

Filed 12/07/2004

Page 2 of 3

Cl.), on December 24, 2004, a motion for summary judgment in Medgar Evers House Assocs. Ltd. Partnership v. United States, No. 96-909C (Fed. Cl.), on January 14, 2005, a supplemental brief in SAB Construction, Inc. on January 15, 2005, and a brief in Fernandez v. PTO, No. 043343 (Fed. Cir.) on January 28, 2005. Because of these responsibilities, counsel has been unable to devote sufficient time to adequately prepare the Government's reply. In addition, counsel for the Defense Contract Management Agency, who is assisting counsel for the Government in this case, will be unavailable from December 13, 2004, through January 7, 2005. For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request the Court to grant our motion for an enlargement of time of 64 days, to and including February 11, 2005, to file the defendant's reply in support of our motion for summary judgment.

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General s/ David M. Cohen DAVID M. COHEN Director

2

Case 1:00-cv-00129-FMA

Document 81

Filed 12/07/2004

Page 3 of 3

OF COUNSEL: Gregory T. Allen Raymond J. M. Wong Defense Contract Management Agency

s/ Doris S. Finnerman DORIS S. FINNERMAN Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 307-0300\ Fax: (202) 305-7643 Attorneys for Defendant

December 7, 2004

3