Free Answer - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 1 of 9

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

No. 04-790C (Judge Sypolt)

DEFENDANT'S ANSWER For its answer to the complaint, defendant, the United States, admits, denies, and alleges as follows: 1. Denies the allegations in sentence one of paragraph 1

for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth. Admits the allegations in sentence two of

paragraph 1 to the extent supported by the contract cited, No. 292-01-C-0010, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 1. 2. Admits that the United States is the defendant, and

admits the allegations in paragraph 2 to the extent supported by the contract, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 2. 3. The allegations in paragraph 3 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied.

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 2 of 9

4.

Admits the allegations in paragraph 4 to the extent

supported by the contract, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 4. 5. Admits the allegations in paragraph 5 to the extent

supported by the contract, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 5. 6. The allegations in paragraph 6 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. Count I 7. Defendant's responses to paragraphs 1 through 6 of the

complaint are incorporated by reference. 8. The allegations in paragraph 8 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 9. The allegations in paragraph 9 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 10. Admits.

2

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 3 of 9

11.

Admits the allegations in paragraph 11 to the extent

supported by plaintiff's letter dated December 16, 2002, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 11. 12. Admits the allegations in paragraph 12 to the extent

supported by plaintiff's letter to the Government dated March 8, 2003, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 12. 13. Admits the allegations in paragraph 13 to the extent

supported by the Government's letter to plaintiff dated May 12, 2003, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 13. 14. 15. Admits. The allegations in paragraph 15 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. Further denies that plaintiff is entitled

to the relief set forth in the prayer for relief immediately following paragraph 15, or to any relief whatsoever. Count II 16. Defendant's responses to paragraphs 1 through 15 of the

complaint are incorporated by reference. 17. The allegations in paragraph 17 are conclusions of law 3

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 4 of 9

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 18. The allegations in paragraph 18 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no reply is necessary; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 19. Admits the allegations in paragraph 19 to the extent

supported by the "shop drawings" submitted by plaintiff to the Government, which are the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 19. 20. Admits the allegations in paragraph 20 to the extent

supported by the Government's e-mail message to plaintiff dated November 4, 2002, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 20. 21. 22. Denies. Admits the allegations in paragraph 22 to the extent

supported by plaintiff's letter to the Government dated March 8, 2003, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 22. 23. Admits the allegations in paragraph 23 to the extent

supported by the Government's letter to plaintiff dated May 12, 2003, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise 4

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 5 of 9

denies the allegations in paragraph 23. 24. The allegations in paragraph 24 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no reply is necessary; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. Further denies that plaintiff is entitled to

the relief set forth in the prayer for relief immediately following paragraph 24, or to any relief whatsoever. Count III 25. Defendant's responses to paragraphs 1 through 24 of the

complaint are incorporated by reference. 26. The allegations in paragraph 26 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no reply is necessary; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 27. The allegations in paragraph 27 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no reply is necessary; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 28. Admits the allegations in paragraph 28 to the extent

supported by the contract drawings, which are the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 28. 29. Admits the allegations in paragraph 29 to the extent 5

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 6 of 9

supported by the contract drawings, which are the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 29. 30. Denies the allegations in paragraph 30 for lack of

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth. 31. Denies the allegations in paragraph 31 for lack of

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth. 32. Denies the allegations in paragraph 32 for lack of

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth. 33. Admits the allegations in paragraph 33 to the extent

supported by plaintiff's letter to the Government dated March 8, 2003, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 33. 34. Admits the allegations in paragraph 34 to the extent

supported by the Government's letter to plaintiff dated May 12, 2003, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 34. 35. Denies the allegation in sentence one of paragraph 35

regarding what Jowett believes for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to its truth; denies 6

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 7 of 9

the allegation in sentence one of paragraph 35 that the Government paid Jowett's subcontractor directly. The allegations

in sentence two of paragraph 35 are conclusions of law and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no reply is necessary; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 36. The allegations in paragraph 36 are conclusions of law

and plaintiff's characterization of its case to which no reply is necessary; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. Further denies that plaintiff is entitled to

the relief requested in the prayer for relief immediately following paragraph 36, or to any relief whatsoever. 37. Denies each and every allegation not previously

admitted or otherwise qualified.

WHEREFORE, defendant requests that the Court enter judgment in its favor, order that the complaint be dismissed, and grant defendant such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director

7

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 8 of 9

S/ ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR. ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR. Assistant Director

Of Counsel: MOGBEYI E. OMATETE General Attorney Department of Health and Human Services 330 Independence Ave., S.W. Room 4760 Washington, DC 20201 Tel. (202) 619-0179 Fax. (202) 619-2922

S/ KELLY B. BLANK KELLY B. BLANK 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) 307-1011 Fax. (202) 514-8624 Attorneys for Defendant

July 20, 2004

8

Case 1:04-cv-00790-LSM

Document 9

Filed 07/20/2004

Page 9 of 9

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on July 20, 2004, a copy of the foregoing "DEFENDANT'S ANSWER" 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. may access this filing through the Court's system. /s/ KELLY B. BLANK Parties