Pershing Ct of Claims

1
In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 14-740 C (Filed: October 10, 2014) ************************************* LOUISE RAFTER et al., * * Plaintiffs, * * v. * * THE UNITED STATES, * * Defendant. * ************************************* ORDER On October 10, 2014, defendant in the above-captioned case filed an unopposed motion for an extension of time to respond to plaintiffs’ complaint. This case is coordinated with jurisdictional discovery in Fairholme Funds, Inc. v. United States, 13-465. Defendant thus requests that it be required to respond to plaintiffs’ complaint sixty days after jurisdictional discovery has concluded in Fairholme. For good cause shown, the motion is GRANTED; defendant’s response to plaintiffs’ complaint is due sixty days after the completion of jurisdictional discovery in Fairholme. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Margaret M. Sweeney MARGARET M. SWEENEY Judge Case 1:14-cv-00740-MMS Document 9 Filed 10/10/14 Page 1 of 1

description

Pershing Ct of Claims

Transcript of Pershing Ct of Claims

Page 1: Pershing Ct of Claims

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 14-740 C (Filed: October 10, 2014)

************************************* LOUISE RAFTER et al., * * Plaintiffs, * * v. *

* THE UNITED STATES, * * Defendant. * *************************************

ORDER

On October 10, 2014, defendant in the above-captioned case filed an unopposed motion for an extension of time to respond to plaintiffs’ complaint. This case is coordinated with jurisdictional discovery in Fairholme Funds, Inc. v. United States, 13-465. Defendant thus requests that it be required to respond to plaintiffs’ complaint sixty days after jurisdictional discovery has concluded in Fairholme. For good cause shown, the motion is GRANTED; defendant’s response to plaintiffs’ complaint is due sixty days after the completion of jurisdictional discovery in Fairholme.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Margaret M. Sweeney MARGARET M. SWEENEY Judge

Case 1:14-cv-00740-MMS Document 9 Filed 10/10/14 Page 1 of 1