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


File Size: 36.7 kB
Pages: 4
Date: November 18, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 650 Words, 4,343 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/20013/9.pdf

Download Joint Preliminary Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims ( 36.7 kB)


Preview Joint Preliminary Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:05-cv-00587-FMA

Document 9

Filed 11/18/2005

Page 1 of 4

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

No. 05-587C (Judge Allegra)

JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT Pursuant to Appendix A of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"), plaintiff and defendant respectfully submit the following joint preliminary status report: a. Jurisdiction

Plaintiff states that the Court has jurisdiction to consider and decide this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491. Defendant is not aware of a basis upon which to challenge the Court's jurisdiction at this time. b. Consolidation

The parties agree that this case should not be consolidated with any other case. c. Bifurcation

The parties agree that trial of liability and damages should not be bifurcated. d. Deferral

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.

Case 1:05-cv-00587-FMA

Document 9

Filed 11/18/2005

Page 2 of 4

e.

Remand/Suspension

The parties agree that no remand or suspension will be sought. f. Joinder

The parties agree that no additional parties will be joined. g. Dispositive Motions

After discovery has been completed, the parties may submit cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to RCFC 56. h. 1. Relevant Issues Whether, in soliciting bids for the contract at issue, the Air Force acted

negligently by failing to provide reasonably accurate estimates of its demand for wash services. 2. Assuming that the Air Force's estimates were negligently prepared, whether and

to what extent Sterling relied upon these estimates to its detriment in preparing its bid. 3. Whether the Air Force properly disallowed payment for and provided

documentation with respect to services that it deemed inadequate. 4. Whether the Air Force required Sterling to perform towing services that were not

included in the contract. 5. Whether, in issuing modification 06 to the contract, the Air Force properly

exercised its option to extend services.

2

Case 1:05-cv-00587-FMA

Document 9

Filed 11/18/2005

Page 3 of 4

i.

Settlement

The parties anticipate pursuing settlement negotiations on an informal basis as the litigation progresses. j. Trial

As stated above, after discovery has been completed, the parties may submit crossmotions for summary judgment pursuant to RCFC 56. If dispositive motions are not submitted, or if they are not completely dispositive of this action, the parties anticipate proceeding to trial. The parties do not request expedited trial scheduling. k. Electronic Case Management

Parties have no special issue regarding electronic case management needs. l. Additional Information

The Plaintiff submitted a total of nine (9) claims to the contracting officer for a final decision. The contracting officer issued a final decision on the five (5) claims identified in this complaint. The parties are trying to negotiate the other four (4) claims; however, if negotiations are unsuccessful, the Plaintiff may have to amend this complaint to resolve all of the claims on the contract. m. Proposed Discovery Plan

The parties intend to conduct simultaneous discovery through interrogatories, requests for admission, requests for production of documents, and depositions. The parties propose the following discovery schedule: Exchange of Initial Disclosures Close of Fact Discovery 3 January 1, 2006 June 1, 2006

Case 1:05-cv-00587-FMA

Document 9

Filed 11/18/2005

Page 4 of 4

Plaintiff's Expert Report Due Defendant's Expert Report Due Deadline for Expert Depositions

July 20, 2006 August 20, 2006 September 30, 2006

Respectfully submitted,

PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General

DAVID M. COHEN Director

s/ Franklin E. White, Jr. FRANKLIN E. WHITE, JR. Assistant Director s/William A. Scott Pedersen & Scott, P.C. 775 St. Andrew Blvd. Charleston, SC 29407 Tel. (843) 556-5656 Fax (843) 556-5635 s/ Andrew P. Averbach ANDREW P. AVERBACH Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit, 8th Floor Washington, DC 20530 Tel. (202) 353-0527 Fax (202) 305-2118 Attorneys for Defendant

Attorneys for Plaintiff November 18, 2005

4