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

Case 1:07-cv-00579-MMS

Document 9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS BLR GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 07-579C (Chief Judge Damich)

DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME Pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Rules of this Court, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests a 30-day enlargement of time within which to respond to the complaint of plaintiff, BLR Group of America, Inc. ("BLR"). Currently, our response is due on October 1, 2007. The extension would bring the date for responding to plaintiff's complaint to October 31, 2007. This is the defendant's first request for an enlargement of time for this purpose. Counsel for plaintiff has indicated that plaintiff is not opposed to this motion. This 30-day request for enlargement is necessitated by the fact that Government counsel has received neither a litigation report nor draft response to plaintiff's complaint from the agency. According to agency counsel, agency personnel work and travel schedules prevented the agency from providing the Department of Justice with its litigation report and/or draft response. Because a litigation report and/or draft response to plaintiff's complaint is essential for formulating a response to plaintiff's claims, counsel for the Government has been unable to devote meaningful time to this case. The additional time requested is necessary to enable the agency to provide the undersigned trial counsel with the materials, to enable the undersigned trial counsel to review the

Case 1:07-cv-00579-MMS

Document 9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 2 of 4

agency's materials, coordinate the contents of our response with agency counsel, prepare a response, and to obtain the necessary internal approval. The additional time requested by this motion also takes into account the undersigned trial counsel's work schedule, which has included over the last month and will include over the next month, briefing in the bid protest, RKR Joint Venture, Inc. v. United States, No. 07-630C, settlement negotiations in Croman Corp. v. United States, Nos. 98-405C and 01-40C, and numerous responsibilities in Adams v. United States, No. 90-162C.. For these reasons, defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant defendant's unopposed motion for an enlargement of time of 30 days, through and including October 31, 2007, within which to respond to plaintiff's complaint.

Case 1:07-cv-00579-MMS

Document 9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director /s/ Todd M. Hughes

TODD M. HUGHES Deputy Director

/s/ William P. Rayel

WILLIAM P. RAYEL Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 616-0302 Facsimile: (202) 307-0972 September 24, 2007 Attorneys for Defendant

Case 1:07-cv-00579-MMS

Document 9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on September 24, 2007, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME" 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. Parties may access this filing through the Court's system.

/s/ William P. Rayel William P. Rayel