Legal Opinion

Lucent Technologies Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided January 31, 2006No. 04-1511CPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

BRADEN, Judge.

RELEVANT FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 6, 2005, the Government filed a Motion to Transfer and Suggestion of the Appropriateness of Consolidation (“Gov’t *513Mot.”), requesting the transfer of Lucent Technologies Inc. v. United States (“Lucent”), No. 04-1511C, from the undersigned judge to the Honorable Charles F. Lettow, because Lucent is “directly related,” within the meaning of RCFC 40.2(a), to two cases that then were pending before Judge Lettow, and, therefore, “[A]ll three cases ... should be handled by a single Judge in order to ‘conserve…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Karuk Tribe of California v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
  2. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
  3. Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Colonial Chevrolet Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
  2. Alley's of Kingsport, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
  3. Zafer Taahhut Insaat Ve Ticaret, A.S. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  4. Lowry Economic Redevelopment Authority v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  5. AT & T Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API