Free Joint Preliminary Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00144-MBH

Document 9

Filed 06/19/2006

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS PCL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. )

No. 06-144C (Judge Horn)

JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT Pursuant to Rule 16 and Appendix A, Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, the parties submit the following Joint Preliminary Status Report in response to questions set forth in paragraph III(4) of Appendix A. a. Jurisdiction:

The parties currently perceive no jurisdictional defects in this case. b. Consolidation:

The parties do not believe that this case should be consolidated with any other case. c. Bifurcation:

The parties do not believe that the trial of liability and quantum should be bifurcated.

K:\My Documents\PCL New\JPSR.wpd

Case 1:06-cv-00144-MBH

Document 9

Filed 06/19/2006

Page 2 of 5

d.

Deferral:

The parties know of no reason to defer proceedings in this case pending consideration of any other case presently before the Court. e. Remand/Suspension:

The parties do not seek remand or suspension of the case. f. Joinder:

The parties do not believe any other party will be joined. g. Dispositive Motions:

The defendant anticipates filing one or more dispositive or partially dispositive motions to address the fact that PCL has already litigated a case arising out of the same construction project before this Court and before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Defendant believes that, if a

dispositive motion does not resolve the case entirely, then the scope of the case should be narrowed as much as possible prior to the parties and the Court engaging in protracted discovery, pretrial, and trial proceedings. h. l. Relevant Issues: How much of PCL's new claim, if any, and complaint are

barred by the doctrines of issue preclusion, claim preclusion, law of the case, or stare decisis. 2. Whether the Government delayed or disrupted PCL's

contract performance in the manner and to the extent alleged by

K:\My Documents\PCL New\JPSR.wpd

2

Case 1:06-cv-00144-MBH

Document 9

Filed 06/19/2006

Page 3 of 5

PCL in its certified claim and complaint. 3. Whether the Government can be, or is, liable to PCL for

additional contract payments arising out of PCL's alleged performance of so-called "CRX's" that have not been previously resolved by the parties or by the Court. 4. If there is any Government liability to PCL, what is the

appropriate amount of damages to be awarded. i. Settlement:

The parties will conduct settlement negotiations, and will discuss the possibility of submitting this case for alternative dispute resolution as discovery proceeds. If the parties agree

to pursue alternative dispute resolution, we will notify the Court promptly. j. Trial:

Both parties anticipate proceeding toward trial should dispositive motions, ADR, or settlement prove to be inappropriate. The parties recommend that trial should be held

in Denver, Colorado. k. Electronic Case Management:

The parties are aware of the Court's electronic case management procedures and will comply with them. In addition,

the parties will cooperate with regard to the use of electronic document management techniques where possible, including the use of electronic exhibits at trial.

K:\My Documents\PCL New\JPSR.wpd

3

Case 1:06-cv-00144-MBH

Document 9

Filed 06/19/2006

Page 4 of 5

l.

Other Information:

There is no other information of which the Court should be made aware at this time. Discovery: The parties believe that defendant's dispositive motion with regard to the entire case should be adjudicated prior to the establishment of a discovery schedule. The parties agree that if

the dispositive motion process requires an exchange of discoverable information in order for the motion or response/s to be complete, the parties will cooperate in the exchange of such information in accordance with the Court's rules. The Court has

already scheduled a status conference for June 28, 2006, during which the parties propose to discuss the schedule for the dispositive motion/s phase of the case. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KIESLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/Deborah A. Bynum DEBORAH A. BYNUM Assistant Director s/Brian S. Smith BRIAN S. SMITH Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit
K:\My Documents\PCL New\JPSR.wpd

4

Case 1:06-cv-00144-MBH

Document 9

Filed 06/19/2006

Page 5 of 5

8th Floor, 1100 L St. NW Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 616-0391 Attorneys for Defendant s/Durward E. Timmons Durward E. Timmons 90 South Cascade Avenue Suite 1500 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Phone: (719)-475-2440 Attorney for Plaintiff September 9, 2004

K:\My Documents\PCL New\JPSR.wpd

5