[Cboldt]

I don't know anything about this case, and after reading this I still don't. I do know that there are other reasons not to respond to a motion.

In this case, it is a motion for summary judgement. Such a motion will be granted if there are no grounds for a trial. There are no grounds for a trial if there is no issue of material fact, and judgement is permitted by law. There is no need to re-assert that there are issues of material fact; and any facts in dispute must be given to the non-moving party in order to render a decision on the motion (i.e., take the government's side AS TRUE! and faced with that, conclude that the opponent wins anyway).

[Cboldt]

I mispoke. The non-moving party has to produce (or have earlier produced!) evidence that there is an issue of material fact. The government may have already introduced evidence sufficient to meet the burden of the motion of summary judgement.