United States' Motion for Modification of Minute Order

UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF MINUTE ORDER

Pursuant to Local Rule 16(b), the United States respectfully moves the Court to modify the schedule set forth in its Minute Order of July 25, 2006.

Consistent with the schedule set forth in that Order, on August 7, 2006, the United States filed additional materials for the Court's consideration. The materials, which included highly confidential information, were filed under seal pursuant to the Order entered by the Court on August 4, 2006 ("Protective Order"). Under Paragraph 8 of that Protective Order, however, the United States may not serve materials containing highly confidential information on any defendant or amicus ("Interested Person") until three business days after that Interested Person has filed a signed Agreement of Confidentiality with the Court. Two Interested Persons filed Agreements of Confidentiality immediately after entry of the Protective Order, and were served with the materials on August 9, the first day permissible under the Protective Order. Other amici, however, did not file an Agreement of Confidentiality until as late as August 8. The United States will serve each amicus as soon as it may do so under the Protective Order, but under the current schedule this would effectively result in a reduction to the ten day period for responses originally set by the Court for the amici.

In order to prevent any potential prejudice to the amici, the United States respectfully requests that the Court extend the schedule by four days, such that the responses of all amici are due on or before August 21, 2006, and the replies of the parties are due on or before August 31, 2006. This extension will preserve the ten day periods that the Court originally established for the amicis' responses and the parties' replies.

The United States has conferred with the defendants and amici regarding this proposed extension of time. The National Association of States Utility Consumer Advocates, the New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel, and AT&T do not object to this extension. Verizon has not responded. Other amici have not consented and have indicated to the United States that they may seek a further extension of time, citing other considerations. The United States will respond to any such motions if and when they are filed. This motion is intended solely to maintain the ten day period to respond that the Court originally set.