Clinchfield Coal Co. v. United States

*594OPINION

BUSH, Judge.

The court now has before it plaintiffs’ motion to continue stay, filed October 14, 2011.1 In their motion, plaintiffs suggest that a recently filed case in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia should be resolved before this court addresses the merits of plaintiffs’ claims. For the reasons discussed below, plaintiffs’ motion is denied.

BACKGROUND2

Plaintiffs are related companies based in Virginia, West Virginia or Kentucky that produce, sell and export coal. Compl. ¶¶ 2-3. On January 25, 2002, almost ten years ago, plaintiffs filed a complaint in this…