Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

NextEra Energy v. Spain, Motion to Extend the Time to File a Response, May 20, 2025

20 May 2025
NextEra Energy Global Holdings B.V. and NextEra Energy Spain Holdings B.V. v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/11
View case details
Motion to Extend the Time to File a Response
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Motion to Extend the Time to File a Response
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Arbitrator(s)
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Judges
Claimant's counsel
Carter G. Phillips
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's counsel
Shay Dvoretzky, Matthew S. Rozen
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Entities
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Sidley Austin, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, NextEra Energy Global Holdings B.V., Blasket Renewable Investments, Spain
Country
United States
Print reporter
Document Summary
Motion to Extend the Time to File a Response
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

This document is a letter application submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of Respondents NextEra Energy Global Holdings B.V., NextEra Energy Spain Holdings B.V., and 9REN Holdings S.À.R.L. in the matter of Kingdom of Spain v. Blasket Renewable Investments LLC, et al., No. 24-1130.

Pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 15.3 and 30.4, counsel for the Respondents respectfully requests a 35-day extension of time, from June 4, 2025, to July 9, 2025, to file their brief in opposition to the petition for a writ of certiorari. The grounds for the request include the need to address anticipated amicus curiae briefs in support of the Petitioner and scheduling conflicts arising from counsel's other professional commitments, including briefing and oral arguments in other federal court matters.