IN RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY FOR ACCESS TO CERTAIN SEALED COURT RECORDS

Filing 25

IN RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY FO...TAIN SEALED COURT RECORDS25 Doc.

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DAVID C. RODEARMEL, Plaintiff, No. 1:09-cv-00171-RBW-JR v. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, et al., Defendants. Errata to Reply in Support of Motion of Professors of Linguistics for Leave to File Memorandum as Amici Curiae The movants argued in their reply memorandum that the plaintiff's opposition was untimely. We now withdraw that argument. As a result of communications with the plaintiff's counsel, we have realized that the method we used in our reply for computing the plaintiff's deadline was mistaken because it did not take into account the 2005 amendment to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. Under the counting method required by that amendment, the plaintiff's opposition was timely. We apologize for the error. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Neal Goldfarb Neal Goldfarb, No. 337881 Butzel Long Tighe Patton, PLLC 1747 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 [phone] [e-mail] Attorney for Movants and putative amici Honorable Karen LeCraft Henderson Honorable James Robertson Honorable Reggie B. Walton

Dockets.Justia.com