Rogerson v. United States

• Court: United States Court of Federal Claims
• Decided: February 12, 2014
• Docket: 1:10-cv-00683
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

O ~~ ,,~~1l~A•·l Case 1:10-cv-00683-VJW Document 24 Filed 02/12/14 Page 1 of 1

I\~ It .. ;.ij

3Jn tbe mtniteb ~tates ctrourt of jfeberal ctrlaims No. 10-683C (Filed February 12, 2014) NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED ************************ FEB 12 2014 * KAY L. ROGERSON, * U.S. COURT OF * FEDERAL CLAIMS Plaintiff, * * v. * * THE UNITED STATES, * * Defendant. * * ************************

ORDER

On February 10, 2014, the Clerk's Office received a document submitted by plaintiff with the title "Request for Default Judgment." Plaintiff mistakenly (though perhaps understandably, as she is proceeding without the assistance of counsel) believes that defendant's decision not to file an optional response to plaintiffs supplement to her reply brief, see Order (Dec. 27, 2013), amounts to a default. This, however, is not correct. See Rule 55 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims; Alli v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 172, 178-79 (2010). The government has defended itself in this matter, opposing plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and moving for a dismissal, and thus plaintiffs request is DENIED. To the extent material in plaintiffs supplement is relevant to the pending dispositive motions, it will be considered by the Court in the context of resolving those motions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.