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

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS INFORMATION SYSTEMS & NETWORKS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 06-99C (Judge Block)

JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT Pursuant to Rule 16 and Appendix A of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, plaintiff Information Systems & Networks Corporation ("ISN"), and defendant, the United States, by their representative attorneys, respectfully submit this Joint Preliminary Status Report: a. Does the Court have jurisdiction over the action?

Plaintiff states that the Court has jurisdiction to consider and decide this action pursuant to 41 U.S.C. § 609. Defendant is

not aware of a basis upon which to challenge the Court's jurisdiction at this time. b. Should the case be consolidated with any other case?

The parties agree that this case should be consolidated with Information Systems & Networks Corporation v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-387 (Chief Judge Damich). This second case, Fed. Cl.

No. 06-387, was filed subsequent to this action and should be consolidated under this action, Fed. Cl. No. 06-99. Both cases

involve the same contracts and, indeed, the two final decisions issued by the contracting officer in each case were issued in

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 2 of 8

response to plaintiff's December 14, 2004 claim letter. Counsel for plaintiff will be filing a notice of related cases pursuant to RCFC 40.2 in Fed. Cl. No. 06-387 in the very near future. c. Should the trial of liability and damages be bifurcated?

At this time, the parties do not believe that trial should be bifurcated as to liability and damages. d. Should further proceedings in this case be deferred pending consideration of another case before this Court or any other tribunal?

The parties agree that further proceedings in this case should not be deferred pending consideration of another case before this Court or any other tribunal. e. Will a remand or suspension be sought?

The parties do not believe that remand or suspension will be sought. f. Will additional parties be joined?

It is not anticipated that additional parties will be joined. g. Does either party intend to file a motion pursuant to RCFC 12(b), 12(c), or 56, and, if so, what is the proposed schedule for the intended filing?

Defendant intends to file a motion for summary judgment as to the issue of liability, following the close of discovery.

-2-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 3 of 8

h. 1.

What are the relevant issues? Whether the costs sought by ISN for lease costs for its

corporate offices in excess of the cost of ownership are unallowable. 2. Whether the costs sought by ISN for vehicles and

computer equipment in excess of the cost of ownership are unallowable. 3. Whether the costs sought by ISN of certain pension plan

payments were unallowable because of ISN's failure to fund its pension plan in a timely manner. 4. Whether ISN's shifting of certain corporate costs from

G&A into an intermediate cost pool for its fiscal years 1992-1995 violated FAR 31.203. 5. Whether various miscellaneous costs for ISN's fiscal

years 1998 and 1992-94, totaling $53,680, were unallowable. i. What is the likelihood of settlement?

The parties do not believe that settlement in this case is possible. However, after completion of discovery, the parties

anticipate that the issue of settlement will be considered. j. Do the parties anticipate proceeding to trial? Does any party, or do the parties jointly, request expedited trial scheduling? What is the requested place of trial?

Assuming that the case is not resolved upon motions for summary judgment, or that the case does not settle, the parties

-3-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 4 of 8

anticipate proceeding to trial. trial scheduling.

Neither party requests expedited

If a trial is required, the parties request

the trial be held in Washington, D.C. k. Are there special issues regarding case management needs?

As discussed above, the parties believe that Fed. Cl. No. 06-387 should be consolidated with this case, under Fed. Cl. No. 06-99. The Government's answer currently is due to be filed in It is anticipated that, by that Accordingly,

that case on September 9, 2006.

time, the two cases will have been consolidated.

any discovery schedule or other litigation deadlines established in this case will apply equally to Fed. Cl. No. 06-387. l. Is there any other information of which the Court should be aware of at this time?

The parties are unaware of any other information of which the Court should be aware of at this time. m. Discovery Plan

The following discovery plan is submitted based upon the assumption that Fed. Cl. No. 06-387 will be consolidated with this case. Accordingly, we have set forth dates that would allow

for filing of an answer and preparation of the JPSR in that matter (or filing of a consolidated JPSR covering both cases). The Government's answer currently is due September 8, 2006. Accordingly, the JPSR in Fed. Cl. No. 06-387 would be due on or

-4-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 5 of 8

about October 19, 2006.

Accordingly, the parties propose the

following discovery deadlines: Exchange of initial disclosures: Designation of Experts: Designation of Rebuttal Experts: Plaintiff's Expert Report: Defendant's Expert Report: Plaintiff's Rebuttal Expert Report: Defendant's Rebuttal Expert Report: Close of Discovery: November 3, 2006 March 2, 2007 April 6, 2007 August 3, 2007 October 5, 2007 November 2, 2007 December 7, 2007 January 4, 2008

-5-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 6 of 8

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ Mark A. Melnick MARK A. MELNICK Assistant Director OF COUNSEL: GREGORY ALLEN Trial Attorney Defense Contract Management Agency Manassas, Virginia s/ David B. Stinson DAVID B. STINSON Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor, 1100 L St. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 307-0163 Fax: (202) 514-8624 Attorneys for Defendant

July 28, 2006

-6-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 7 of 8

s/ Norman H. Singer Singer & Associates 10411 Motor City Drive Suite 725 Bethesda MD 20817-1002 Tele: (301) 469-0400 Fax: (301) 469-0403 Attorney for Plaintiff

-7-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 9

Filed 07/28/2006

Page 8 of 8

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on JULY 28, 2006, a copy of the foregoing "JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT" was filed electronically. I understand that notice of this filing will be

sent to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. system. s/ David B. Stinson DAVID B. STINSON Parties may access this filing through the Court's