CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SERVIN et al

Filing 25

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 15 MOTION to Dismiss and Plaintiff's Opposition Thereto by MORGAN GOODWIN, JOHN and JANE DOES NOS. 1-20, SARAH MURPHY, JACQUES SERVIN, DAVID SIEVERS, SUPPORT AND COMMITMENT, INC., IGOR VAMOS (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Corn-Revere, Robert)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JACQUES SERVIN, et al. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 09-CV-02014-RWR DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF Defendants Jacques Servin, Igor Vamos, Support and Commitment, Inc., David Sievers, Morgan Goodwin, Sarah Murphy and John and Jane Does No. 1-20 (collectively “Defendants”), through undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1)(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, respectfully move this Court, unopposed, for an order extending the time by which Defendants must file a reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss in the above-captioned action to and including Friday, February 19, 2010. 1. Defendants were served with Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss on February 5, 2010. Pursuant to an order entered by this Court on January 15, 2010, Defendants’ reply is due on Monday, February 15, 2010. 2. Defendants seek an extension of the deadline to file their reply up to and including February 19, 2010. 3. Defendants request this extension due to the unprecedented and severe winter weather conditions in the Washington, D.C. As the Court is aware, such conditions have cause 1 the closure of federal government offices for several days. Counsel’s offices also have been closed during this time. 4. Pursuant to LCvR 7(m), Defendants’ counsel conferred with Plaintiff’s counsel on this motion, and Defendants hereby file this motion unopposed. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request the entry of an order extending the time by which Defendants must file a reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss to and including February 19, 2010. Dated: February 11, 2010. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Robert Corn-Revere Robert Corn-Revere (D.C. Bar No. 375415) bobcornrevere@dwt.com Lisa B. Zycherman (D.C. Bar No. 495277) lisazycherman@dwt.com DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE, LLP 1919 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 973-4225 (202) 973-4499 fax Bruce E. H. Johnson (admitted pro hac vice) brucejohnson@dwt.com Ambika Doran (admitted pro hac vice) ambikedoran@dwt.com DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE, LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101-3045 (206) 622-3150 (206) 757-7700 fax Thomas R. Burke (admitted pro hac vice) thomasburke@dwt.com DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE, LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94111-6533 (415) 276-6500 (415) 276-6599 fax 2 Matthew Zimmerman (pro hac vice pending) mattz@eff.org Corynne McSherry (pro hac vice pending) corynne@eff.org ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco, CA 94110 (415) 436-9333 (415) 436-9993 fax CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to LCvR 5.3, I hereby certify that, on February 11, 2010, I electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court the foregoing Unopposed Motion to Extend Time to File Reply Brief and proposed order using the CM/ECF system, and service was effected electronically pursuant to LCvR 5.4(d) on the parties listed below. Michael John Mueller Hunton & Williams LLP 1900 K Street, NW, Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20006 mmueller@hunton.com Deepak Gupta Public Citizen Litigation Group 1600 20th Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 dgupta@citizen.org Gregory A. Beck Public Citizen Litigation Group 1600 20th Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 gbeck@citizen.org /s/ Robert Corn-Revere Robert Corn-Revere (D.C. Bar No. 375415) 3

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?