Free Description not available - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 1 of 8

EXHIBIT A

OBJECTIONS TO AFFIDAVIT OF LINDA FLATLEY
Plaintiff objects to the Affidavit of Linda Flatley (Defendant's Appendix pp 1 ­ 5) on the grounds that it is not based on personal knowledge as required by Rule 56. Plaintiff also objects to the affidavit paragraph 6 since it does not identify the specific time periods for which Ms. Flatley was the contract officer for the applicable contract. Without this information it is impossible to discern the basis for her

knowledge to the extent that a specific time period is at issue. Plaintiff also objects to the affidavit paragraph 7 in that it is so general it cannot be determined what involvement Ms. Flatley had and what knowledge she obtained as a result. Plaintiff objects to paragraphs 12 and 13 as hearsay. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 15 on the grounds that Ms. Flatley does not appear competent to testify on the issue. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 19 on the grounds that affiant is not competent to testify as to the meaning given to estimates by others, is conclusory and is not the best evidence of what the estimates meant since the estimates were included in the Contract and no ambiguity has been pleaded, nor is one apparent. This is a violation of the Parol

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 2 of 8

evidence rule. Further, this paragraph is not credible since it is contradicted by affiant's earlier "non-litigation" position as shown in Plaintiff's reply brief. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 22 as a legal conclusion without foundation or relevance. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 26 as hearsay with respect to other team members. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 28 and speculation without foundation. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 29 as ambiguous and misleading. The provision at issue was in the contract. Plaintiff objects to paragraphs 30 and 31 as legal conclusions without foundation or relevance. Plaintiff objects to paragraph 32 as a legal conclusion and not credible, and hearsay with respect to any other persons with whom United Medical raised the issue.

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 3 of 8

EXHIBIT B
OBJECTIONS TO AFFIDAVIT OF DONNA GALLIGAN Plaintiff objects to the affidavit of Donna Galligan (Defendant's Appendix pp 197-210) as follows: It is not based on personal knowledge as required by Rule 56(e). There is no foundation for Plaintiff's claim of familiarity in paragraph 7. The affidavit evidences her role as a team leader beginning in 1999, but her affidavit appears to concern prior periods without any basis for knowledge for such prior periods. Paragraph 9 is a general conclusion and a legal conclusion without foundation. Paragraph 10 is a legal conclusion without foundation or relevance. Paragraphs 14 through 24 are legal conclusions without foundation and are speculation as to this affiant. Paragraph 24 is also hearsay with respect to "customers." Paragraphs 25 through 39 are speculation and hearsay. Affiant is attempting to testify as to the meaning of unauthenticated documents that themselves are hearsay.

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 4 of 8

EXHIBIT C Objections to documents filed by Defendant as "summary judgment" evidence.

Apparent Document Description Affidavit

Apparent Author Linda Flatley

Defend ant's Apdx Page # 1-5

Plaintiff's Objection Affidavit is based on being personally "acquitted" (sic) with the facts and is not based on personal knowledge. Paragraph 6 does not identify the time period when Flatley was the contract officer on the contract at issue and cannot support factual allegations that would require her to have been the contract officer at a given point in time. Paragraph 17 is Ms. Flatley's interpretation of the contract and is irrelevant and is not the best evidence of the contract's meaning. The last two sentences of Paragraph 19 are the affiant's assumptions and conclusions as to the meanings of statements by unidentified third parties and are irrelevant. In paragraph 26 Affiant purports to have knowledge of the communications and thought processes of other persons and no foundation is shown for such knowledge. Paragraph 29 is directly contradicted by pre-claim correspondence with affiant and is not credible. Paragraphs 30 and 31 are the legal

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 5 of 8

Apparent Document Description

Apparent Author

Defend ant's Apdx Page #

Plaintiff's Objection conclusions of affiant and are irrelevant. Paragraph 32 is contradicted by preclaim correspondence with affiant and is not credible.

Government Letter Seeking Estimates Customer Response Award Document

Marie Boggs

11-13

Unauthenticated and hearsay

Unknown

14-23 24-25

Unauthenticated and hearsay Irrelevant. This is a different contract number, concerns the stockless option, which was never exercised by any of the ordering facilities. That is, no ordering facility elected to substitute the stockless option procedures under contract 7134 for the distribution procedures under contract 7133, and Defendant does not offer any evidence that any medical treatment facility elected to substitute the stockless option. The contract at issue in this case is 7133. Unauthenticated and hearsay. Defendant purports to claim that it is a letter from Plaintiff, however, on its face the handwritten portion evidences it was a form and there is no competent evidence that any such letter was ever sent by Plaintiff or received by and medical treatment facility. United Medical was not a party to this contract and these amendments are irrelevant, unauthenticated and are hearsay. Unauthenticated and hearsay.

UMS letter forwarding commitment form

Nancy Martin

26 - 27

Amendments 16, 17 and 18 to Owens & Minor contract Emails

Owens & Minor/Depart ment of Defense Nancy Martin, James Jennings,

28-33

34-35

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 6 of 8

Apparent Document Description

Apparent Author Kristina Fites Michael Schmitt Anthony Amendolia Nancy Martin Nancy Martin Anthony Amendolia Linda Flatley

Defend ant's Apdx Page # 36-38 39-40 41 42-44 45-48 63-66

Plaintiff's Objection

Government letter Government email Government email Government letters Government Memorandum Government letter

Unauthenticated, unsigned and no evidence the letter was sent, hearsay. Unauthenticated, hearsay Unauthenticated, hearsay Unauthenticated, hearsay Unauthenticated, hearsay Unauthenticated, hearsay and multiple references to hearsay. Additionally paragraphs numbered 1 through 5 are the legal conclusions of the author. Unauthenticated and multiple hearsay Unauthenticated and multiple hearsay

Government letter Government emails Internal Government Memorandum Internal Government emails Internal Government worksheet Internal Government email Internal Government Memorandum Internal Government email

Nancy Martin Donna Kennedy/ Oscar Molinar Melvin Hicks

67-71 100-103

104-106

Unauthenticated and hearsay

Donna Kennedy/ Oscar Molinar Unknown

111-113

Unauthenticated and multiple hearsay

114-119

Unauthenticated, hearsay

Oscar Molinar

120

Unauthenticated, hearsay

Melvin Hicks

121-122

Unauthenticated, hearsay

Melvin Hicks

123

Unauthenticated, multiple hearsay

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 7 of 8

Apparent Document Description Internal Government emails

Apparent Author Anthony Amendolia/ Donna Kennedy/ Oscar Molinar Various Melvin Hicks

Defend ant's Apdx Page # 170

Plaintiff's Objection Unauthenticated, multiple hearsay, incomplete on its face.

Government emails Internal Government memorandum Internal Government Emails Affidavit

177-188 189

Unauthenticated, multiple hearsay. Unauthenticated, multiple hearsay.

Various

190-196

Unauthenticated, multiple hearsay.

Donna Galligan

197-210

Plaintiff's letter with handwritten comments Daily Delivery Records Plaintiff's letter with handwritten comments Delivery

June Lyon as to typewritten, unknown as to handwritten Unknown June Lyon as to typewritten, unknown as to handwritten Unknown

211

Not based on personal knowledge. Many of the affiant's statements are simply legal conclusions about contract requirements, for example: numbered paragraphs 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18,23, 24, and 33. The affidavit references attachments by number, but the attachments do not contain reference numbers. (Plaintiff was not served with a hard copy of the affidavit and attachments. The electronic copy downloaded by Plaintiff does not identify where the alleged attachments end). The affidavit obviously is based on hearsay attachments and not on personal knowledge. The handwritten comments are unauthenticated and hearsay

212-214 215

Unauthenticated, hearsay The handwritten comments are unauthenticated and hearsay

221

Unauthenticated, hearsay

Case 1:03-cv-00289-FMA

Document 32-2

Filed 01/05/2004

Page 8 of 8

Apparent Document Description Manifest Plaintiff's letter with handwritten comments Daily Delivery Records Plaintiff's letter with handwritten comments Delivery Manifest Contract Number Query Plaintiff's letter with handwritten comments Delivery Manifest Government email

Apparent Author

Defend ant's Apdx Page # 222

Plaintiff's Objection

June Lyon as to typewritten, unknown as to handwritten Unknown June Lyon as to typewritten, unknown as to handwritten Unknown Unknown June Lyon as to typewritten, unknown as to handwritten Unknown Donna Galligan/ Megan Edmonds Connie Lucash June Lyon as to typewritten, unknown as to handwritten Unknown Donna Kennedy Anthony Amendolia

The handwritten comments are unauthenticated and hearsay

223 224-228

Unauthenticated, hearsay The handwritten comments are unauthenticated and hearsay

230 231 232

Unauthenticated, hearsay Unauthenticated, hearsay The handwritten comments are unauthenticated and hearsay

235-236 237-238

Unauthenticated, hearsay Unauthenticated, hearsay as to the Galligan portion

Government fax Plaintiff's letter with handwritten comments Chart Government email Internal Government email

239-245 246

Unauthenticated hearsay. The handwritten comments are unauthenticated and hearsay

257-259 260 261

Unauthenticated, hearsay. Unauthenticated, hearsay. Unauthenticated, hearsay.