AL-ZAHRANI v. DONALD RUMSFELD, et al

Filing 7

MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond by UNITED STATES (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Werner, Paul)

Download PDF
AL-ZAHRANI v. DONALD RUMSFELD, et al Doc. 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) Donald RUMSFELD, et al. ) ) and ) ) UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) Talal AL-ZAHRANI, et al., Case No.: 1:09-CV-00028 (ESH) MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1), the United States, by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for a 30-day enlargement of time, up to and including May 27, 2009, for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. In support of this motion, the United States asserts as follows: 1. Plaintiffs instituted this action with the filing of their Complaint on January 7, 2009. 2. Plaintiffs amended their Complaint on January 29, 2009. 3. Service was accomplished as to all Defendants no sooner than February 26, 2009, the date upon which the U.S. Attorney General was served. See Affidavit of Return of Service 27 [Dkt # 5]; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i) (requiring two-tiered service for the United States and for federal officers sued in their individual capacity). Thus, the current deadline for the Defendants' response to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint is April 27, 2009. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2), (3); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a). Even assuming service was accomplished as to all Defendants on February Dockets.Justia.com 23, 2009, see Affidavit of Return of Service 27 [Dkt # 5], this motion is still timely. 4. Pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), the United States' counsel contacted Plaintiffs' counsel, Pardiss Kebriaei, on April 22 and 23, 2009, along with Shayana Kadidal on April 23, 2009, regarding the contents of this motion. Plaintiffs' counsel was unavailable and undersigned counsel left telephone messages on both days indicating the United States' intention to file this motion and this motion's contents. 5. This request is made in good faith and not for purposes of delay. 6. Defendants have not previously requested or been given an extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. 7. There are no other previously scheduled deadlines in this case. A proposed Order is attached. Dated: April 24, 2009 Respectfully submitted, MICHAEL F. HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Division JEFFREY A. TAYLOR United States Attorney District of Columbia TIMOTHY P. GARREN Director, Torts Branch /s/ Philip D. MacWilliams PHILIP D. MACWILLIAMS (D.C. Bar No. 482883) Trial Attorney, Torts Branch Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 888 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 (202) 616-4285 (202) 616-5200 (facsimile) /s/ Paul E. Werner PAUL E. WERNER (MD Bar, under LCvR 83.2(e)) Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Torts Branch, Civil Division P.O. Box 7146 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 (202) 616-4152 (phone) (202) 616-4314 Attorneys for the United States CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on April 24, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following: Pardiss Kebriaei Shayana Kadidal CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012 pkebriaei@ccrjustice.org Counsel for Plaintiffs Meetali Jain International Human Rights Law Clinic American University WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF LAW 4801 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20016 mjain@wcl.american.edu Counsel for Plaintiffs /s/ Paul E. Werner PAUL E. WERNER (MD Bar, under LCvR 83.2(e)) Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Torts Branch, Civil Division P.O. Box 7146 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 (202) 616-4152 (phone)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?