Free Notice of Directly Related Case(s) - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 11-2

Filed 09/07/2006

Page 1 of 4

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

No. 06-387C (Chief Judge Damich)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND SUGGESTION OF CONSOLIDATION Pursuant to RCFC 40.1, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests that this case be transferred to the Honorable Lawrence Block. Pursuant to RCFC 42(a), defendant

likewise respectfully suggests that both cases be consolidated under Fed. Cl. No. 06-99C. As noted in our motion for enlargement of time, filed June 29, 2006, plaintiff, in February 2006, filed an earlier action in this Court, Information Systems & Networks Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 06-99C (J. Block). Counsel for defendant

raised with counsel for plaintiff the fact that Fed. Cl. No. 0699C and this case (Fed. Cl. No. 06-387C) are related and that a notice of related cases is required pursuant to RCFC 40.2. Counsel for plaintiff informed counsel for defendant and agency counsel that he would be filing a notice of related cases in the near future. Likewise, in the parties' joint preliminary status

report ("JPSR"), filed in the earlier-filed case on July 28,

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 11-2

Filed 09/07/2006

Page 2 of 4

2006, the parties agreed that this case should be consolidated with the earlier-filed case. To date, counsel for plaintiff has not filed a notice of related cases. Because defendant will be filing this week its

answer in this case, defendant is filing in the previously-filed case a notice of directly related case. Transfer of this case to Judge Block is appropriate. In

addition, consolidation of this case, Fed. Cl. No. 06-387, with Fed. Cl. No. 06-99C, likewise is appropriate. Both cases involve

the same contracts and, indeed, the two final decisions issued by the contracting officer in each case were issued in response to plaintiff's December 14, 2004 claim letter. Because both cases share some common factual and legal issues, and because the outcome of Fed. Cl. 06-99C will have a direct impact upon the outcome of Fed. Cl. 06-387C, assignment of both cases to a single judge, and consolidation of the actions, is appropriate and will conserve judicial resources and promote an efficient determination of both actions. Indeed, the parties,

in their JPSR filed in Fed. Cl. No. 06-99C, set forth a discovery schedule that assumed consolidation of the actions and included sufficient time to allow simultaneous exchange of initial disclosure in both actions.

-2-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 11-2

Filed 09/07/2006

Page 3 of 4

For these reasons, defendant respectfully requests that this action be transferred to the Honorable Judge Block and suggests that the two cases be consolidated under Fed. Cl. No. 99C. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ Mark A. Melnick MARK A. MELNICK Assistant Director 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

OF COUNSEL: GREGORY T. ALLEN Defense Contract Management Agency

September 7, 2006

-3-

Case 1:06-cv-00099-LB

Document 11-2

Filed 09/07/2006

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on September 7, 2006, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND SUGGESTION OF CONSOLIDATION" 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. filing through the Court's system. Parties may access this

s/ David B. Stinson DAVID B. STINSON