OTAY MESA PROPERTY L.P et al v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR et al

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 8 MOTION to Intervene

D.D.C.May 28, 2008

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) OTAY MESA PROPERTY L.P, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 1:08-CV-00383 (RMC) ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, et al., ) ) Defendants, ) ) and ) ) CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, ) ) Movant. ) _________________________________________ ) PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME FOR RESPONDING TO INTERVENOR-APPLICANT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY’S MOTION TO INTERVENE AS A DEFENDANT Plaintiffs respectfully request an extension of time to file their response to Intervenor- Applicant Center for Biological Diversity’s Motion to Intervene as a Defendant. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). The Center for Biological Diversity filed their Motion to Intervene as a Defendant on May 20, 2008. Under Local Rule 7(b), Plaintiffs’ response to Intervenor-Applicant’s Motion is due on June 3, 2008. The Center’s Motion to Intervene raises numerous complex issues. In order to adequately respond to these issues, Plaintiffs request an additional two weeks in which to file their response. Additionally, an extension of time is warranted in this matter because of unavoidable conflicts with other cases. Specifically, Plaintiffs’ counsel is required to file a brief Case 1:08-cv-00383-RMC Document 12 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 1 of 2 in Preservation of Los Olivos and Preservation of Santa Ynez v. The United States Dept. of the Interior, C.D. Cal. No. 06-1502, on Friday May 30, 2008 and to file the Answer to a Complaint in United States of America v. John R. Cumbie, D.S.C. No. 08-1825, on June 3, 2008. These and other unavoidable scheduling conflicts, along with the complexity of the legal issues presented in the Center’s Motion to Intervene, make it impossible for Plaintiffs to file their response within the current deadline. Plaintiffs’ counsel has conferred with the Defendants’ counsel, pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), and Defendants’ counsel has advised that they take no position. Additionally, Plaintiffs’ counsel has unsuccessfully attempted to contact the Center’s counsel regarding this Motion. Undersigned counsel is therefore unable to state whether the Center opposes this Motion. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter an order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1), to enlarge the time for Plaintiffs to file their response to Intervenor- Applicant’s Motion to Intervene to Tuesday, June 17, 2008. Respectfully submitted, /s/Nancie G. Marzulla________________ Nancie G. Marzulla, D.C. Bar No. 400985 Roger J. Marzulla, D.C. Bar No. 39490 Gregory T. Jaeger, D.C. Bar No. 425169 MARZULLA & MARZULLA 1350 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 410 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 822-6760 (202) 822-6774 (facsimile) May 28, 2008 Counsel for Plaintiffs -2- Case 1:08-cv-00383-RMC Document 12 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 2 of 2