`
`IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
`
`
`
`E-NUMERATE SOLUTIONS, INC. and
`E-NUMERATE, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`THE UNITED STATES,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No. 19-859 C
`
`Judge Ryan T. Holte
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`Defendant, the United States (“the Government”), hereby submits its response to
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs’ Application for Oral Argument. See ECF 16. The Government does not oppose
`
`Plaintiffs’ request that the Court hear oral argument on the Government’s Motion to Dismiss.
`
`See ECF 8.
`
`
`
`The decision of whether to hear oral argument is completely within the Court’s
`
`discretion. Rule 12 of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”) does not require the Court to hold
`
`an oral hearing if a party has otherwise had an opportunity to present its views. See RCFC 12;
`
`Gallo-Rodriguez v. United States, 513 F. App’x 971, 973-74 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Briefing is
`
`complete with respect to the Government’s Motion to Dismiss, and all parties to the litigation
`
`had a full and fair opportunity to present their respective views. See ECF 8, 15, 19.
`
`Nevertheless, the Government is prepared to argue its Motion if the Court determines that oral
`
`argument would be beneficial.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 20 Filed 01/24/20 Page 2 of 2
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`JOSEPH H. HUNT
`Assistant Attorney General
`
`GARY L. HAUSKEN
`Director
`
`
`s/Scott Bolden
`SCOTT BOLDEN
`Deputy Director
`Commercial Litigation Branch
`Civil Division
`Department of Justice
`Washington, DC 20530
`Email:
`Scott.Bolden@USDOJ.gov
`Telephone:
`(202) 307-0262
`Facsimile:
`(202) 307-0345
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`January 24, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`SHAHAR HAREL
`Department of Justice
`
`RICHARD M. HUMES
`Associate General Counsel
`
`GEORGE C. BROWN
`Assistant General Counsel
`
`NELSON KUAN
`Senior Counsel
`Office of the General Counsel
`U.S. Securities and Exchange
`Commission
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
