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

Case 1:03-cv-01798-EJD

Document 45

Filed 07/05/2005

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ___________________________________ ) AMERICAN RENOVATION AND ) CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________)

Case No. 03-1798C (Chief Judge Damich)

UNOPPOSED JOINT MOTION FOR AN ENLARGMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO INTERVENOR CLASSICAL FINANCIAL'S COMPLAINT COMES NOW the Plaintiff, American Renovation & Construction Company ("ARC") and the Defendant, the United States, by counsel, and pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"), jointly move for an enlargement of time of 30 days, from July 5 until August 4, 2005, to file their respective responses to the Complaint of Intervenor Classical Financial Services, LLC ("Classical"), stating as follows: 1. 2. 2003. 3. 4. Classical filed an Intervenor's Complaint on May 6, 2005. On May 17, 2005, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company Plaintiff, ARC, filed the Complaint in this case on July 28, 2003. Defendant, the United States, filed its Answer on November 25,

("St. Paul") moved to intervene as a Plaintiff in the lawsuit and on June 1, 2005,

Case 1:03-cv-01798-EJD

Document 45

Filed 07/05/2005

Page 2 of 4

St. Paul moved to amend/correct its motion to intervene. The Court has not ruled on St. Paul's Motion to Intervene at this time. 5. Pursuant to RCFC Rule 12, the Court's Order dated April 28, 2005

(Docket #41), and the Clerk's Docket Entry #42, Plaintiff, ARC, and Defendant, the United States, were required to file their respective responsive pleadings to Classical's Complaint on or before July 5, 2005. 6. St. Paul, ARC, the United States, and Classical, by counsel, have

initiated discussions to attempt an amicable resolution of the issues in this lawsuit. 7. In order to facilitate further discussions between the parties, ARC

and the United States jointly seek an enlargement of time by 30 days to file their respective responses to Classical's Complaint 8. Respective counsel for the United States and ARC have discussed

this motion with counsel for Classical and represent that Classical does not oppose the enlargement of time requested herein.1 9. This is the first request by ARC and the United States for an

enlargement of time for this purpose.

1

The current attorney of record for Classical is William Collins. Defendant's counsel recently contacted Mr. Collins to discuss the status of the settlement and left a message when Mr. Collins was unavailable. Defendant's counsel was subsequently contacted by attorney T.J. Frasier of the Robertson Group. Ms. Frasier stated she would be filing an entry of appearance upon behalf of Classical and would otherwise be assuming responsibility for the representation of Classical in this matter. 2

Case 1:03-cv-01798-EJD

Document 45

Filed 07/05/2005

Page 3 of 4

WHEREFORE, ARC and United States respectively request the Court for an enlargement of time of 30 days, until August 4, 2005, to file their respective responses to Classical's Complaint. Respectfully submitted,

HARISH C. MIRCHANDANI Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, L.L.P 8405 Greensboro Drive, Suite 100 McLean, VA 22102 Tel. (703) 749-1000 Fax. (703) 893-8039 Attorney for Plaintiff DATED: July 5, 2005

PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ Robert E. Kirschman, Jr. ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR. Assistant Director

s/Michael N. O'Connell MICHAEL N. O'CONNELL Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor Washington, DC 20530 Tel. (202) 305-3634 Fax. (202) 514-8624 Attorneys for Defendant DATED: July 5, 2005

3

Case 1:03-cv-01798-EJD

Document 45

Filed 07/05/2005

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on July 5, 2005, a copy of the foregoing Unopposed Joint Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Intervenor Classical's Complaint was filed electronically. I understand that a copy of the Unopposed Joint Motion 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/ Michael N. O'Connell

4