You're viewing Docket Item 56 from the case ST. BERNARD PARISH GOVERNMENT v. USA. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 1:05-cv-01119-SGB Document 56 Filed 02/13/2008 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

ROCCO TOMMASEO, and
THOMAS TOMMASEO, and
ROCKY AND CARLO, INC., and
STEVEN BORDELON, husband of,
and CYNTHIA BORDELON and,
STEVE’S MOBILE HOME & R.V. REPAIR,
INC., et al.,


)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
__________________________________________)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

Plaintiffs,

v.

No. 05-1119L

Hon. Susan G. Braden

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

IN WHICH TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CLASS

ACTION COMPLAINT

Defendant, United States, hereby moves for an enlargement of time of 10 days, or to and

including February 29, 2008, for the filing of its response to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Class

Action Complaint (“Second Amended Complaint”).

On January 31, 2008, this Court granted Plaintiffs leave to file their Second Amended

Complaint. Docket No. 54. That same day, Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint.

Docket No. 55. On February 2, 2008, the Court set February 19, 2008 as the deadline for

Defendant’s response to the Second Amended Complaint.

No previous enlargements of time for this response have been requested.

This case arises out of the construction and maintenance of the Mississippi River Gulf

Outlet (“MRGO”) adjacent to St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana. See 2nd Am. Compl. at 13.

Plaintiffs allege that the United States is liable for a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the

1

Case 1:05-cv-01119-SGB Document 56 Filed 02/13/2008 Page 2 of 2

United States Constitution because the MRGO has allegedly worsened flooding in certain parts

of St. Bernard Parish. See, e.g., 2nd Am. Compl. at ¶¶ 1, 13-14.

Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint raises technical and complicated issues which

can only be addressed by Corps personnel; thus, additional time is required to ensure circulation

of the Second Amended Complaint to appropriate personnel. Additionally, Defendant’s counsel

of record has been out of the office on another case since the filing of Plaintiffs’ Second

Amended Complaint. Accordingly, Defendant requests this 10-day enlargement of time.

Counsel for Defendant has conferred with counsel for Plaintiffs who has indicated that

Plaintiffs do not object to this enlargement.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests an enlargement of time of 10 days, or to and including

February 29, 2008, for the filing of its response to the Second Amended Complaint.

Respectfully submitted this 13th day of February, 2008,

RONALD J. TENPAS
Assistant Attorney General
Environment & Natural Resources Division

s/ Fred R. Disheroon by Mark T. Romley
Fred R. Disheroon, Special Litigation Counsel
Mark T. Romley, Trial Attorney
Natural Resources Section
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice
601 D St. N.W., Room 3022
Washington D.C. 20004
(202) 616-9649

2