IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT DEFEENDANT-APPELLEE S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD ON APRIL 15, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Defendants-Appellees.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 12/15/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 51-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Plaintiffs-Appellants, Docket Nos (L), 445(Con) DECLARATION OF SARAH S. NORMAND. SARAH S. NORMAND, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1746, declares as

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR STAY PENDING SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Case 1:13-cv MMS Document 294 Filed 02/09/16 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case: , 04/24/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 23-1, Page 1 of 2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse 40 Foley Square, New York, NY Telephone:

Case: , 12/29/2014, ID: , DktEntry: 20-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case: , 07/03/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 12-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 1:05-cv WMN Document 88 Filed 08/20/2007 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Tel: (202)

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JEFFREY ALEXANDER STERLING, and JAMES RISEN,

Case 1:13-cv EGB Document 120 Filed 06/28/16 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

Case: , 01/08/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 55-1, Page 1 of 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit DAVID JOHN SLATER, WILDLIFE PERSONALITIES, LTD.,

Case: Document: 6 Filed: 11/03/2016 Pages: 6 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OFFICE OF THE CLERK B

Case: /16/2014 ID: DktEntry: 37-1 Page: 1 of 4 (1 of 9) NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 03/23/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 38-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC DCA CASE NO. 3D THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, -vs- MAXIMILIANO ROMERO, Respondent.

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No In the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

.J)J-- CLERK Cheryl Quirk La udrieu . J..J~><---- FREDERICKA HOMBERG WICKER JUDGE VACATED AND REMANDED. COURT OF APPEAL FIFTH erne U1T

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Petitioners, Real Parties in Interest.

Case: , 08/14/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 46-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Case 2:09-cv CAS-MAN Document 107 Filed 05/07/10 Page 1 of 9 Page ID #:1464 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Appellant, CASE NO. SC v. Lower Tribunal No CFAWS RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Case: , 10/18/2016, ID: , DktEntry: 57-1, Page 1 of 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 05/19/2016, ID: , DktEntry: 33-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Nos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. ROSALINA CUELLAR DE OSORIO; et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPELAS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 01/02/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 43-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 4:16-cv ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779

STATE OF LOUISIANA DR. BARBARA FERGUSON AND CHARLES J. HATFIELD VS. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 08/16/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 28-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 07/23/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 39-1, Page 1 of 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case: , 07/31/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 60-1, Page 1 of 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:09-cv KJM-CKD Document 35 Filed 09/26/11 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 08/27/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 126-1, Page 1 of 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 02/19/2016, ID: , DktEntry: 54-1, Page 1 of 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 04/25/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 61-1, Page 1 of 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS 2015-CA JOSHUA HOWARD Appellant-Defendant v. THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee-Plaintiff

SAMPLE FORM F NOTICE DESIGNATING RECORD ON APPEAL

Case: , 03/16/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 46-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION 3:75-CR :06-CV-24-F

Leave to file reply brief of up to 10,500 words.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STEPHEN J. WINDHORST JUDGE

Nos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. STEVE TRUNK, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,

Case: /20/2014 ID: DktEntry: 56-1 Page: 1 of 4 (1 of 13) NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 5:14-cv Document 51 Filed in TXSD on 05/29/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LAREDO DIVISION

[NOT YET SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

In the United States Court of Appeals

No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

No (and consolidated cases) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, Decision Filed Mar. 5, 2014 ED PRIETO; COUNTY OF YOLO,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENT

No [DC# CV MJJ] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. RUSSELL ALLEN NORDYKE; et al., Plaintiffs - Appellants,

No. 51,005-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * SUCCESSION OF HENRY EARL DAWSON * * * * *

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. On September 11, 2017, nearly two months after the court heard oral

Pakootas, Donald R. Michel, and State of Washington,

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 47 Filed: 03/07/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:580

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No John Teixeira; et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants,

[ORAL ARGUMENT NOT SCHEDULED] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT : : : : MOTION TO GOVERN

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT SUSAN L. VAUGHAN, ANDERSON REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER,

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

SCA Hygiene (Aukerman Laches): Court Grants En Banc Review

Case: , 04/17/2019, ID: , DktEntry: 37-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

Case: , 02/14/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 73-1, Page 1 of 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR CALVERT COUNTY, MARYLAND

Case: Document: Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/28/2013

HANS J. LILJEBERG JUDGE

Transcription:

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-1 Page: 1 Filed: 11/29/2016 (1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT ANTHONY PISZEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 2015-5100 UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. DEFEENDANT-APPELLEE S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 26(b, defendant-appellee, the United States, respectfully requests that the Court grant a 40-day extension of time, to and including January 15, 2017, to file its response to of the petition for rehearing en banc filed by plaintiff-appellant, Anthony Piszel. The United States response is currently due on December 6, 2016. This is the United States first request for additional time for this purpose. We have contacted Mr. Piszel s counsel, William Donnelly, who has informed us that Mr. Piszel does not oppose the requested extension. A response to a petition for rehearing en banc must authorized by the Court. See Fed. R. App. P. 35(e. The Court authorized the United States to submit a response to plaintiff-appellant s petition for rehearing en banc on November 22, 2016. This occurred just before the Thanksgiving holidays and undersigned

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-1 Page: 2 Filed: 11/29/2016 (2 of 7 counsel was unavailable for several days as a result. Moreover, undersigned counsel s supervisory responsibilities, responsibilities in other matters, and holiday vacation plans will limit counsel s ability to dedicate time to the Government s response in upcoming weeks. These responsibilities include the supervision of a team of attorneys handing scores of cases in the United States Court of Federal Claims, the taking of deposition discovery in Waverley View v. United States, No. 15-371 (Fed. Cl., and assisting with the briefing of appeals in Love Terminal Partners, L.P. v. United States, No. 16-2276 (Fed. Cir., and St. Bernard Parish Gov t v. United States, Nos. 16-2301 & 16-2373 (Fed. Cir.. This extension of time is sought to enable assigned counsel to review relevant materials, confer with the agency, prepare the United States response, and obtain supervisory review, while at the same time complying with continuing responsibilities regarding other matters. The requested extension of time is reasonable under the circumstances. Accordingly, the United States respectfully requests that this unopposed motion for extension be granted and that the Court permit the filing of United States brief on or January 15, 2016. Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN C. MIZER Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 2

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-1 Page: 3 Filed: 11/29/2016 (3 of 7 ROBERT E. KIRSHMAN, JR. Director FRANKLIN E. WHITE, JR. Assistant Director Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division s/ David A. Harrington DAVID A. HARRINGTON Assistant Chief Natural Resources Section Environment and Natural Resources Division United States Department of Justice P.O. Box 7611 Washington, D.C. 20044 (202 305-0244 November 29, 2016 Attorneys for the United States 3

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-1 Page: 4 Filed: 11/29/2016 (4 of 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that on this 29th day of November, 2016, a copy of the foregoing Defendant-Appellee s Unopposed Motion For An Extension Of Time, the Declaration of David A. Harrington, and a Proposed Order was filed electronically. X This filing was served electronically to all parties by operation of the Court s electronic filing system. /s/ David A. Harrington A copy of this filing was served via: hand delivery mail third-party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 days electronic means, with the written consent of the party being served To the following address: 4

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-2 Page: 1 Filed: 11/29/2016 (5 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT ANTHONY PISZEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 2015-5100 UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. DECLARATION OF DAVID A. HARRINGTON In support of the motion of the United States for an extension of time, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, I, David A. Harrington, declare as follows: 1. I am the lead attorney assigned to this action for defendant-appellee, the United States. 2. Pursuant to Federal Circuit Rule 26(b(5, the circumstances that warrant this extension are set forth below. 3. The Court authorized the United States to submit a response to plaintiff-appellant s petition for rehearing en banc on November 22, 2016. This occurred just before the Thanksgiving holidays and I was unavailable for several days as a result. 4. In addition, my supervisory responsibilities, responsibilities in other matters, and holiday vacation plans will limit my ability to dedicate time to the Government s response in upcoming weeks. These responsibilities include the

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-2 Page: 2 Filed: 11/29/2016 (6 of 7 supervision of a team of attorneys handing scores of cases in the United States Court of Federal Claims, the taking of deposition discovery in Waverley View v. United States, No. 15-371 (Fed. Cl., and assisting with the briefing of appeals in Love Terminal Partners, L.P. v. United States, No. 16-2276 (Fed. Cir., and St. Bernard Parish Gov t v. United States, Nos. 16-2301 & 16-2373 (Fed. Cir.. 5. This requested extension is sought to enable assigned me to review relevant materials, confer with the agency, prepare the United States response, and obtain supervisory review, while at the same time complying with continuing responsibilities regarding other matters. Executed this 29th day of November 2016. s/ David A. Harrington David A. Harrington Assistant Chief Environment and Natural Resources Division 2

Case: 15-5100 Document: 89-3 Page: 1 Filed: 11/29/2016 (7 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT ANTHONY PISZEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 2015-5100 UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. ORDER Upon reading and considering DEFENDANT-APPELLEE S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENTION OF TIME and all other relevant papers and proceedings, it is ORDERED that defendant-appellee s motion is granted and defendantappellee s response to plaintiff-appellant s petition for rehearing en banc is due to be filed on or before January 15, 2017. FOR THE COURT Dated:, 2016 Washington, D.C. cc: David A. Harrington, Esq. William Donnelly, Esq.