ATF files motion saying they should not have to pay

[Newsbot]

WASHINGTON, District of Columbia USA — Attorneys for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives today finally filed the ATF's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Petition for Attorney's Fees and Costs motion in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, after exhausting two extensions of time granted by the court earlier in June and July. Assistant United States Attorney Channing D. Phillips, acting counsel for the ATF, filed the motion today, citing a litany of excuses why Judge Reggie B. Walton should dismiss the motion for return of attorney's fees outright, or at least severely pare back the payout. The motion cites Local Civil Rule 7(m), which mandates consultation with the opposing side prior to filing any non-dispositive motion, although the court did not invoke the local rule governing mandatory consultation, asking Judge Walton to dismiss the plaintiff's motion out of hand.

More...

 

[shrox]

All of us need to tear into this. The ATF should cover the costs of their failed attempt to strangle our hobby.

 

[dave carver]

I can't express myself without getting banned forever from this forum.

Freaking outraged doesn't even cover it.


I gotta stop here and go for a walk, I'm seething in anger.:hot:

 

[quickburst]

Its the ATF, once again, shirking responsibility.

Pitiful.

 

[lmt56]

I am thinking maybe it is not a good idea to kick a wounded animial. So to speak. We may have won an important battle but they could yet win the war.

 

[quickburst]

I strongly disagree.

the ATF needs to own up to "vapor science" and all else they do "under the table".

Kick them while they're down? Of course, do you think they would cut us any slack?

 

[SwingWing]

I can't express myself without getting banned forever from this forum.

Freaking outraged doesn't even cover it.


I gotta stop here and go for a walk, I'm seething in anger.:hot:

Don't let it upset you too much, it's just a step in the process, not a ruling. We didn't really expect them just to pay up without the judge ruling that they have too.
We say "you need to pay us back"
They say "no, we don't want too!"
Now it's up to Reggie

 

[jadebox]

Don't let it upset you too much, it's just a step in the process, not a ruling.

There's actually quite a few laughs in their response to our motion.

For example, the ATF questions the expertise of our attorney because he miswrote "APCP" as "ACPC" on an unpublished note. I guess they didn't notice that the final ruling the court issued includes the same mistake!

-- Roger

 

[dave carver]

It's their whole tone in that letter. I know we only get excerpts from it but it just shows their un-abashed ignorance to science and their willingness to continue on in an agressive manner.

"Indignant" that any one would challenge them...what a laugh!! Just because we are a hobby that wouldn't cave into their high-handed schnanagins.

Their "acting council" should learn that ATF already tried BS science and a huge tome of lies to get their way, I think Judge Walton is aware of their form of BS and will not look favoribily towards them.

You might say that the ATF shot themselves in the foot on this one.:bangbang:

Quite frankly they should be made to pay 3x what we are asking for as a punitative measure for the time and money wasted on fighting them

 

[dmo]

Hopefully the TRA/NAR lawyers have the expertise to point out in their response that paper and candle wax are perfectly good fuels for rockets and, in fact, have been used in hobby rockets. When combined with sufficient oxidizer they are easily capable of "propel[ing] hobby rockets into the sky more than a mile".

The total amount of energy available in a reaction has nothing to do with its usefulness as an explosive, it is how fast that energy can be released.

If the ATF's lawyer doesn't understand that basic principle, they probably should get a new layer.

If the ATF doesn't understand that, they shouldn't be writing up the list of explosives.

 

[MysticalRockets]

Don't let it upset you too much, it's just a step in the process, not a ruling. We didn't really expect them just to pay up without the judge ruling that they have too.
We say "you need to pay us back"
They say "no, we don't want too!"
Now it's up to Reggie

Who will probably come back with "Both parties will go off and make a settlement that they will both be happy with so I don't have to make a ruling (aka Do any work). You have 6 months."

Business as usual with our court system.