Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Kellogg Brown & Root

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


October 1, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
KELLOGG BROWN & ROOT SERVICES, INC., DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Royce C. Lamberth, Chief Judge,

ORDER

On August 31, 2012, this Court resolved several discovery disputes. U.S. v. Kellogg, Brown & Root Servs., Inc., __ F.R.D. __, 2012 WL 3776708 (D.D.C. 2012) (ECF Nos. 116, 117). That Opinion indicated that defendant Kellogg, Brown & Root ("KBR") is entitled to limited discovery on force protection matters relating to the parties' LOGCAP III agreement. U.S. v. KBR, 2012 WL 3776708 at *10--*12. The Court ordered the parties to meet and confer, over the following thirty days, to discuss the scope and schedule for this additional production. See id. at *18. The Court ordered the parties, after these thirty days, to apprise the Court of their progress and ask for an extension if necessary. Id.

Those thirty days have passed, and the parties submitted a Joint Status Report in Response to Court Order of August 31, 2012. Oct. 1, 2012, ECF No. 124. The Report states: "The parties are continuing to meet and confer regarding these and other issues and respectfully request the Court to permit the parties an additional week -- i.e., until Tuesday, October 9, 2012 -- to conclude their discussions and apprise the Court of their proposals for future proceedings in this action." Id.

The Court will grant the parties' request for additional time. Therefore, the Court ORDERS:

The parties shall on or before October 9, 2012 apprise the Court of their progress in resolving the remaining discovery issues. A joint Status Update, filed electronically with the Court, will suffice. If the parties come to a compromise, they shall inform the Court of the agreement struck and propose a schedule for accomplishing the additional discovery. If the parties cannot come to an agreement, they may ask the Court for additional time or ask the Court enter an Order to Compel.

IT IS SO ORDERED

Signed by Royce C. Lamberth, Chief Judge, on October 1, 2012.

20121001

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.