Border Timbers v. Zimbabwe

MINUTE ORDER denying Respondent Republic of Zimbabwe's17 Motion to Stay, and granting in part Respondent's18 Motion to Extend Respondent's Time to Answer. In balancing the court's interests in judicial economy and any possible hardship to the parties, see Belize Soc. Dev. Ltd. v. Gov't of Belize, 668 F.3d 724, 732-33 (D.C. Cir. 2012), the court agrees with the Border Timbers Petitioners that an indefinite stay would unduly prejudice them with respect to their positions on issues in common with the von Pezold litigation. The Border Timbers Petitioners should not be effectively bound by the court's rulings in von Pezold. At the same time, the court agrees with Respondent that, as a sovereign, its litigation burden should be mitigated to the extent reasonable. Accordingly, in responding to the Border Timbers Petition, Respondent may, with respect to the issues that overlap with the von Pezold matter, simply adopt and incorporate the arguments it made in its Motion to Dismiss the von Pezold Petition and in opposition to the von Pezold Petitioners' Cross-Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The Border Timbers Petitioners shall in turn, to the extent possible, adopt and incorporate arguments made by Petitioners in the von Pezold litigation on common issues. In short, the parties shall endeavor to focus their arguments in this case on the issues unique to it; the parties shall avoid redundancy with respect to the issues overlapping with the von Pezold litigation. Respondent shall answer the Border Timbers Petition by May 9, 2022. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 4/18/2022. (lcapm1)