Wood v. Dyncorp et al

RESPONSE to 38 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to DynCorp Intl FZ's Motion to Dismiss

D.D.C.August 1, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RONALD WOOD, Plaintiff, v. DYNCORP, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.: 06cv1616 Judge Kollar-Kotelly DEFENDANT DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL FREE ZONE, LLC’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL FREE ZONE, LLC’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR INSUFFICIENCY OF SERVICE OF PROCESS AND LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION Defendant DynCorp International Free Zone, LLC (“DIFZ”), appearing solely for the purpose of challenging insufficient service of process and the personal jurisdiction of this Court over DIFZ, respectfully submits the following response to Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a supplemental memorandum in opposition to DIFZ’s motion to dismiss. It is difficult for DIFZ to evaluate its position regarding Plaintiff’s motion without first having the opportunity to review the “supplemental memorandum” for which Plaintiff requests leave to file. In particular, although Plaintiff contends that it seeks to present facts adduced at the July 19, 2007 deposition of H. Montgomery Hougen, Plaintiff has already included as Exhibit I to his Opposition excerpts from a prior deposition of Mr. Hougen on the issue of the relationship between DIFZ and Case 1:06-cv-01616-CKK Document 39 Filed 08/01/2007 Page 1 of 4 2 DynCorp International, LLC (“DI”) in connection with the Potts v. DynCorp International LLC litigation. Accordingly, it remains unclear what information about the relationship between DI and DIFZ was not previously available to Plaintiff. However, if the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a supplemental memorandum, DIFZ respectfully requests an opportunity to respond within 11 days of the date of service of the Supplemental Memorandum in accordance with Local Rule 7(b). Respectfully submitted, s/ George D. Ruttinger D.C. Bar No. 214445 Amy Laderberg O’Sullivan D.C. Bar No. 474973 CROWELL & MORING LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Tel. (202) 624-2500 Fax (202) 628-5116 Counsel for DynCorp International Free Zone, LLC Dated: August 1, 2007 Case 1:06-cv-01616-CKK Document 39 Filed 08/01/2007 Page 2 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RONALD WOOD, Plaintiff, v. DYNCORP, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.: 06cv1616 Judge Kollar-Kotelly ORDER Upon consideration of Plaintiff Ronald Wood’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to DynCorp International Free Zone, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process and Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Defendant’s Response thereto, and the record herein, it is this _____ day of August, 2007 hereby ORDERED that this Motion is DENIED. The Honorable Colleen Kollar-Kotelly Case 1:06-cv-01616-CKK Document 39 Filed 08/01/2007 Page 3 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on August 1, 2007, a copy of the foregoing Defendant DynCorp International Free Zone, LLC’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to DynCorp International Free Zone, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process and Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and proposed order were filed electronically. I understand that notice of this filing will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system. s/ George D. Ruttinger Case 1:06-cv-01616-CKK Document 39 Filed 08/01/2007 Page 4 of 4