Case Information
*0 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 6/10/2015 3:30:23 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk *1 ACCEPTED 01-15-00266-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 6/10/2015 3:30:23 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE CLERK NO. 01-15-00266-CV IN THE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS
UNOCAL PIPELINE COMPANY Appellant, v.
BP PIPELINES (ALASKA) INC., ET AL. Appellees APPELLANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF GIBBS & BRUNS, L.L.P. mgiugliano@gibbsbruns.com TBA No. 24012702 Anthony N. Kaim akaim@gibbsbruns.com TBA No. 24065532 J. Benjamin Bireley bbireley@gibbsbruns.com 1100 Louisiana, Suite 5300 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 650-8805 Facsimile: (713) 750-0903 A TTORNEYS FOR A PPELLANT U NOCAL P IPELINE C OMPANY *2 TO THE HONORABLE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS:
Appellant Unocal Pipeline Company (“Unocal”) files this Unopposed
Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief, and would respectfully
show the Court as follows:
A. The Present Deadline
The record in this case was filed on May 19, 2015. Under the Texas Rules
of Appellate Procedure, the brief for Appellants is due to be filed on or before June
18, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a).
B. The Length of the Extension Sought
Appellant seeks a thirty (30) day extension of time in which to file its brief.
Specifically, Appellant requests an extension from June 18, 2015 through and
including July 20, 2015, to file its brief.
C. Number of Previous Extensions Granted
This is the first extension Appellant has requested with respect to its brief.
D. Facts Explaining the Needed Extensions
Appellant seeks an extension of time to file its brief for the following
reasons. First, Appellant’s brief involves two summary judgment rulings on
separate causes of action and evidentiary rulings, which were extensively briefed
and argued separately at the trial court. One of the rulings at issue was the subject
of cross motions and the briefing included responses, replies, and sur-replies.
Accordingly, briefing both of these rulings in Appellant’s brief has resulted in the
need for additional time.
Second, Appellant’s counsel has unavoidable professional scheduling
conflicts which interfere with the ability of Appellant to meet the present filing
deadline. The primary drafter of Appellant’s brief is involved in a matter that has
numerous depositions scheduled per week in June.
Appellant has attempted to complete the brief by the present deadline, but
the above-noted conflicts and the numerous issues to be briefed make it impossible
to do so. This request is made not for improper purposes of delay, but so that
justice may be done.
Counsel for Appellees is not opposed to the requested extension.
WHEREFORE, Appellant Unocal Pipeline Company respectfully requests
that the Court grant this Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File its Brief
and extend the time for Appellant to file its brief from June 18, 2015 through and
including July 20, 2015.
Respectfully submitted, G IBBS & B RUNS LLP By: /s/ mgiugliano@gibbsbruns.com Anthony N. Kaim akaim@gibbsbruns.com *4 TBA No. 24065532 J. Benjamin Bireley bbireley@gibbsbruns.com 1100 Louisiana, Suite 5300 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 650-8805 Facsimile: (713) 750-0903 A TTORNEYS FOR A PPELLANT U NOCAL P IPELINE C OMPANY *5 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I certify that I conferred with counsel for Appellees, Michael V. Powell, who
has indicated that Appellees are unopposed to the relief requested in this motion.
/s/ . *6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on the 10th day of June, 2015 I served a copy of the foregoing
document upon the following attorneys of record via e-mail:
Michael V. Powell
Elizabeth L. Tiblets
Locke Lord LLP
2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 2200
Dallas, Texas 75201
Fax: (214) 756-8520
mpowell@lockelord.com
etiblets@lockelord.com
Steven G. Reed
Lara E. Romansic
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
1330 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-1795
Fax: (202) 429-3902
sreed@steptoe.com
lromansic@steptoe.com
/s/ .