Paul L. Hickey and Nellida F. Hickey - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          Petitioners filed an Objection to respondent’s motion to dismiss.           
               This matter was called for hearing at the Court’s motions              
          session in Washington, D.C.  Counsel for respondent appeared at             
          the hearing and was heard.  In contrast, there was no appearance            
          by or on behalf of petitioners at the hearing, nor did                      
          petitioners file with the Court a written statement under Rule              
          50(c), the provisions of which were noted by the Court in its               
          Order setting respondent’s motion for hearing.                              
               During the hearing, counsel for respondent informed the                
          Court that respondent had reconsidered his position and concluded           
          that the petition was timely filed with regard to the notices of            
          determination dated July 13, 2001.  In particular, respondent               
          asserted that because the petition was mailed to the Court on May           
          7, 2002, a date within 30 days of the District Court’s April 11,            
          2002, Order denying petitioners’ motion for reconsideration, the            
          petition was timely filed with regard to the notices of                     
          determination dated July 13, 2001.                                          
               Following the hearing, respondent filed a Supplement to his            
          motion to dismiss.  In the Supplement, respondent elaborated on             
          his position with regard to the notices of determination dated              
          July 13, 2001.  However, respondent maintained his original                 
          position that the petition was untimely with regard to the notice           
          of determination dated August 8, 2001.                                      








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011