Free Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 23.6 kB
Pages: 2
Date: July 21, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 399 Words, 2,600 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/23160/62.pdf

Download Order - District Court of Federal Claims ( 23.6 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:08-cv-00261-LAS

Document 62

Filed 07/21/2008

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
************************** WATTS-HEALY TIBBITTS A JV Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant, and IBC/TOA CORPORATION, Defendant-Intervenor. ************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Case No. 08-261C Senior Judge Smith Filed: July 21, 2008

ORDER On July 18, 2008, the Court issued an Opinion and Order under seal. In conjunction with that Opinion, the Court hereby issues the following Order removing the language below from the Protective Order.

ORDER OF INJUNCTION In accordance with Rule 65(a) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United States of America, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pacific, and its officers, agents, servants, employees and representatives, and all persons acting in concert and participating with them respecting further performance of the contract, be and they are hereby RESTRAINED AND ENJOINED from further performance of the contract during the pendency of this action until further order of this Court. The Navy may within the next 45 days designate a new contracting officer to make a new responsibility determination. The new contracting officer must obtain written advice from NAVFAC by someone at the flag officer or presidential appointee level as to the pertinent policy considerations and standards of business integrity in order to find awardees responsible in international contracts. This reconsideration should involve a reasoned analysis of the conduct of

Case 1:08-cv-00261-LAS

Document 62

Filed 07/21/2008

Page 2 of 2

TOA and the statutory and regulatory factors relevant to the purposes of a responsibility determination. The reasons for finding TOA either a responsible contractor or not must be clearly articulated and consistent with the law and Navy policy. If the Navy selects this alternative as opposed to re-solicitation, it shall serve the new responsibility determination on the parties and file it with the Court. Thereafter, the Court will schedule an oral hearing within 15 days of the delivery of this determination to consider it and rule on lifting the injunction or other possible actions. Plaintiff shall post a bond, with a surety authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury in the amount of $1.00. See RCFC 65(c). This amount is established because of the public interest in contractor integrity which benefits both the Plaintiff-protestor and the American public, as well as the Navy.

It is so ORDERED. s/ Loren A. Smith LOREN A. SMITH, SENIOR JUDGE