.
RECEIVEI
BEFORE THE
JUII7 4 29
POSTAL RATE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20266-0001
POSTAL
RATE AND FEE CHANGES,
POSTAL XATC C;:~t!i5t>!oH
OFFICE Oi Tlii SCCfifTAi?'(
Docket
2000
No. R2000-1
DOUGLAS F. CARLSON
OPPOSITION TO MOTION OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
FOR LATE ACCEPTANCE
OF ITS OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL
A RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY
DFCIUSPS-93
June 3,200O
On May 16, 2000, I filed a motion to compel the Postal Service
to DFCIUSPS-93,
a simple and straightfotward
certain
in service-standard
anomalies
Standards
CD-ROM
Postal Service’s
represented
deadline
interrogatory
information
database
for responding
provided
errors.’
did not file an opposition
Postal Service
also filed a motion for late acceptance
I oppose the Postal Service’s
because
the Postal Service
Postal counsel
information
necessary
inadvertently
designed
supposes
on the Service
Pursuant
to Rule 21(b), the
until June 2, 2000, ten days late.’
The
The
of its opposition.3
motion for late acceptance
of its opposition
has failed to show good cause for its tardiness.
to prepare
to provide
my initial brief “might have been discarded
before it was read.‘14 This explanation,
reflect due diligence
asking whether
that my motion to compel the Postal Service
to avoid assigning
to respond
to this motion was May 23, 2000.
Postal Service
responsibility
or good cause.
clouded
to any identifiable
Indeed,
f’H ‘00
with passive
individual,
voice
does not
in this case the Postal Service
’ Douglas F. Carlson Motion to Compel the United States Postal Service to Respond to
DFCIUSPS-93 (filed May 16,200O) (“Carlson Motion to Compel”).
’ Opposition of the United States Postal Service to Motion to Compel Response to
Interrogatory DFCIUSPS-93 (filed June 2.2000).
3 Motion of the United States Postal Service for Late Acceptance of Its Opposition to the
Motion to Compel a Response to Interrogatory DFCIUSPS-93 (filed June 2, 2000) (“Postal
Service Motion”).
’ Postal Service Motion at 1.
once
indignantly
demanded
after the deadline,
mail5 -
that a motion I filed be denied
even though
a circumstance
acceptance.’
In fact, the Postal Service
the Postal Service’s
arrived
at the Postal Service
on the Commission’s
In reality,
have suffered
prejudice.”
nights and weekends
travel to Washington
presumes
position
officer should
of developing
by stating
The discovery
due diligence.
a single document
the testimony
consisting
and evidence
I
is holding
The
of
and to
My work on my
up my work on
dispute.
not permit the Postal Service
an argument
to place me in
on brief about service
errors, only to allow the Postal Service
process
Already,
me no
and library references.
that the examples
late, while
to this interrogatory.
many weeks,
now, and the Postal Service
which
and was posted
for late acceptance.’
I require
to review transcripts
and/or database
By this standard,
that this delay has caused
participant,
late
to my motion to compel,
a response
in the
to remedy the
on the day of filing, May 16, 2000,’
issues with this discovery
The presiding
my arguments
failure to respond
only, to comb through
initial brief is underway
standards
that my failure
a lack of due diligence.’
has filed over 100 motions
incorrectly
service-standard
justified
Web site, surely would not constitute
As an individual
the untenable
alleged
an 18-day delay in obtaining
Postal Service
precedent,
in this case, I have not submitted
the Postal Service
errors.
constituted
present
it was filed
I mailed it on time and the delay occurred
that, under Commission
delay in the mail somehow
solely because
to brush away
I am citing are or are not database
is the appropriate
mechanism
for resolving
these
issues in advance.
’ Opposition of the United States Postal Service to Carlson Motion to Compel Responses to
DFCIUSPS-38,42, and 45, and OFClUSPS-T39-38(b)-(d) (riled April 3.2000).
’ POR MC97-212.
’ Opposition of the United States Postal Service to Carlson Motion to Compel Responses to
DFCIUSPS-38,42, and 45, and DFCAJSPS-T39-36(b)-(d) (filed April 3,200O) at 1-2.
’ Postal Service Motion at 1.
’ POR R2000-l/52 (filed April 27,200O) alone resolved 100 such motions.
” Postal Service Motion at 1.
2
The Postal Service
compel.
The response
Service’s
should
missed the deadline
to this interrogatory
motion for late acceptance
for answering
is already
should
18 days late.
be denied,
The Postal
and my motion to compel
be granted.
Respectfully
Dated:
my motion to
submitted,
June 3. 2000
DOUGLAS
CERTIFICATE
F. CARLSON
OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document upon
the required participants of record in accordance with section 12 of the Rules of
Practice.
DOUGLAS
June 3,200O
Emeryville, California
3
F. CARLSON