Occam's Razor works pretty good for me. She said she wasn't going to be able to rule by the end of the year. (Take that as either her ruling is going to take awhile due to length/research/etc, or take it to mean she knows her holiday schedule and it wasn't going to fit into it -- or combination of both)
And since that made it past Dec 31st, the 'court' was asking -- imho - "Do I continue to have my clerks and myself work on the ruling if you're not going to extend the GSA?" {She obviously is up on the 7.3 section and the automatic expiration vs. extension option}
I think the 29th is arbitrary, but leaving her time to respond if Rosen tries anything 'cute' in the way he responds.
I'm not sure how you read anything one way or the other -- any ruling, whether for equity or against equity is going to be a long ruling. Heck, look at her 2019 ruling, or her Coram ruling, these rulings - quoting case law, explaining why, etc -- are very long.
For me, back to Occam's Razor -- it's really simple. "Are you going to extend the GSA? or are you going to let it expire? The court would like to know so it doesn't waste a bunch of time if you're not going to extend it. And if you extend it, I think I can make the 1/31/2011 timeframe."
That's all I take it as.
...Catz
.
.... Please, just call me Catz ;) - - - - - {and the requisite, all IMHO, do your own due diligence, and make your own investments}
AI
