Kmisener/CBCA_Full huggingface dataset:
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  November 22, 2023
CBCA 7902
INTERSTATE MEAT CO., INC. dba STERLING PACIFIC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Respondent.
James Y. Boland and Caleb E. McCallum of Venable LLP, Tysons, VA, counsel for
Appellant.
Adam J. Hermann, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture,
Kansas City, MO, counsel for Respondent.
ZISCHKAU, Board Judge.
ORDER
On November 8, 2023, appellant filed a request for dismissal of the above-referenced
matter in view of a contracting officer final decision resolving the appeal dispute.  The
request to dismiss is granted.  Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal with prejudice.
  Jonathan D. Zischkau    
JONATHAN D. ZISCHKAU
Board Judge
_____________________________ 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: August 28, 2007 
CBCA 437 
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, 
Appellant, 
v. 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, 
Respondent. 
Karen L. Manos and Christyne K. Brennan of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, 
Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant. 
Jonathan S. Baker and Kenneth A. Redden, Office of the General Counsel, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
DRUMMOND , Board Judge. 
ORDER 
Science Applications International Corporation, appellant, filed a notice of appeal in 
connection with a dispute under contract number 68-W-99-002 for systems engineering and 
other technical services.  On August 24, 2007, the parties filed a joint motion for dismissal 
stating that the parties have settled their dispute and requesting that the Board dismiss the 
appeal with prejudice.  
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
JEROME M. DRUMMOND 

Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  October 24, 2024
CBCA 8001, 8048
VETERANS 1st ARCHITECTURE, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
John T. Gallagher and Jason A. Kamp of Hendrick Phillips Salzman & Siegel, PC,
Atlanta, GA, counsel for Appellant.
Neil S. Deol, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Decatur,
GA, counsel for Respondent.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
ORDER
On October 24, 2024, the parties advised the Board that they had reached a settlement
and requested that these appeals be dismissed.  Accordingly, these appeals are DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE.
    H. Chuck Kullberg         
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
__________________________________ 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  June 14, 2007 
CBCA 405 
HAWORTH, INC., 
Appellant, 
v. 
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, 
Respondent. 
David W. Burgett of Hogan & Hartson L.L.P., Washington, DC, counsel for 
Appellant. 
Michael J. Noble, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, 
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
DeGRAFF , Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On April 22, 2005, Haworth, Inc. filed a notice of appeal in connection with a dispute 
under contract number GS-00F-07010, for the supply of furniture systems.  On June 13, 
2007, the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss with prejudice stating they have fully 
resolved all matters with respect to the appeal. 
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
MARTHA H. DeGRAFF 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: July 2, 2019
CBCA 5623, 6002
MSK CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
Kenneth K. Sorteberg and Mark S. Dachille of Huddles, Jones, Sorteberg & Dachille,
P.C., Columbia, MD, counsel for Appellant.
Neil S. Deol, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Decatur,
GA; and Donald C. Mobly, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Denver, CO, counsel for Respondent.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
ORDER
On July 1, 2019, the parties advised the Board that they had reached a settlement and
requested that this appeal be dismissed.  Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
   H. Chuck Kullberg         
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
MOTION TO VACATE DECISION DENIED: January 19, 2021 
CBCA 6264-R, 6279-R, 6284-R
CARMAZZI GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
Timothy J. Turner and Jonathan D. Perrone of Whitcomb, Selinsky, P.C., Denver, CO,
counsel for Appellant.
Dorothy M. Guy, Brandon Dell’Aglio, Tal Kedem, and Alice M. Somers, Office of
the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Baltimore, MD, counsel for
Respondent.
Before Board Judges SOMERS (Chair), BEARDSLEY, and VERGILIO.
VERGILIO, Board Judge.
In August 2020, the Board upheld three terminations for default and denied the
appeals of Carmazzi Global Solution, Inc. (contractor).  Carmazzi Global Solutions, Inc. v.
Social Security Administration, CBCA 6264, et al., 20-1 BCA ¶ 37,670.  In December 2020,
the contractor moved under Rule 27 (Relief from Decision or Order), 48 CFR 6101.27
(2019), to vacate the decision and reinstate the appeals to reach a determination on the
merits.  In support, it maintains that its failure to respond to the agency’s motion for
summary judgment constitutes a justifiable mistake, inadvertence, and/or excusable neglect.

CBCA 6264-R, 6279-R, 6284-R 2
The motion is ill founded.  In response to the agency’s motion for summary judgment,
the Board already reached the merits in these cases, concluding that the record supported the
terminations for default and that the contractor failed to meet its burden of proof to establish
that its defaults were excusable.  The contractor, through previous counsel, received the
agency’s underlying motion for summary judgment and had every opportunity to respond. 
To now argue that the contractor failed to respond to the motion due to mistake,
inadvertence, or excusable neglect, however, ignores a basic fact.  The trustee in the
bankruptcy case concluded that the contractor should not submit a response to the motion for
summary judgment in these cases (“Please be advised that the trustee has instructed my firm
to not respond to the [motion for summary judgment].  It is his view that the prospect of
prevailing is low at best and that the cost of continuing with the appeal would not likely be
recovered.”).  The record does not demonstrate that the determination not to submit a
response to the motion represents a mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.  The
contractor has not established a basis sufficient to grant relief from the decision; the other
particulars raised by the contractor are not material given the basic flaw in the contractor’s
argument.
Decision
The Board DENIES the appellant’s motion filed under Rule 27.
     Joseph A. Vergilio          
JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
Board Judge
We concur:
    Jeri Kaylene Somers           Erica S. Beardsley          
JERI KAYLENE SOMERS ERICA S. BEARDSLEY
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  November 2, 2012 
CBCA 2797 
MID-HUDSON PROPERTIES, 
Appellant, 
v.
 
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
 
Respondent. 
Jack S. Dweck of The Dweck Law Firm, LLP, New York, NY, counsel for Appellant. 
Leigh Erin S. Izzo and Nicole Ludwig, Office of Regional Counsel, General Services 
Administration, New York, NY, counsel for Respondent 
McCANN, Board Judge. 
ORDER 
Appellant submitted a claim to the contracting officer in the amount of $4439.88 for 
unpaid lease payments under lease number GS-02B-22396. On January 3, 2012, the 
contracting officer issued a final decision denying that claim and appellant filed a timely 
appeal. On October 26, 2012, appellant and respondent filed a joint motion to dismiss the 
appeal with prejudice. The parties indicate that they have fully and finally settled the matter. 

 
                                                 
2 CBCA 2797
 
Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 
R. ANTHONY McCANN 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  March 13, 2026
CBCA 8731
BILLY NOWELL AUTO SALES,
Appellant,
v.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
Emily Nowell Hernandez, General Manager of Billy Nowell Auto Sales, Hugo, OK,
appearing for Appellant.
Jennifer S. Scott, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration,
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
LESTER, Board Judge.
ORDER
On March 12, 2026, the parties notified the Board that appellant had decided to
withdraw this appeal and jointly requested dismissal of the appeal with prejudice.  In
accordance with the parties’ request, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
    Harold D. Lester, Jr.      
HAROLD D. LESTER, JR.
Board Judge
__________________________ 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: January 7, 2008
 
CBCA 551
 
1125 15th STREET, LLC,
 
Appellant, 
v. 
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, 
Respondent. 
Brett D. Orlove of Grossberg, Yochelson, Fox & Beyda, LLP, Washington, DC, 
counsel for Appellant. 
Mel E. Myers, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, 
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
HYATT, Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On December 19, 2007, the parties notified the Board that they have settled this 
appeal and requested that the Board dismiss the appeal with prejudice. 
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
CATHERINE B. HYATT 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  April 13, 2007 
CBCA 442 
COMMONWEALTH COMMERCE GROUP, 
Appellant, 
v. 
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, 
Respondent. 
James W. Alexander of Day & Sawdey, P.C., Grand Rapids, MI, counsel for 
Appellant. 
Paul J. Maxse, Office of Regional Counsel, General Services Administration, 
Chicago, IL, counsel for Respondent. 
DeGRAFF , Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On March 8, 2006, Commonwealth Commerce Group filed a notice of appeal in 
connection with a dispute under lease number GS-05B-15806, for the lease of office space 
for the use of the Social Security Administration in Jackson, Michigan.  On April 13, 2007, 
appellant filed a request to dismiss the appeal stating full payment of the amount required 
by the parties’ settlement agreement had been received. 

__________________________________ 
2 CBCA 442 
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
MARTHA H. DeGRAFF 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  March 11, 2015
CBCA 3213, 3559
SBBI, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION,
Respondent.
John T. Flynn of Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial, LLC, Atlanta, GA,
counsel for Appellant.
Matthew A. Myers, Sr. and Rebecca Ann Rizzuti, Office of the Legal Advisor,
United States Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and
Mexico, El Paso, TX, counsel for Respondent.
GOODMAN, Board Judge.
ORDER
The appellant has informed the Board that these apeals have been settled and
requested that they be dismissed with prejudice.
Accordingly, these appeals are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
__________________________
ALLAN H. GOODMAN
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  June 26, 2025
CBCA 7864
BURHAN SECURITY SERVICES,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Respondent.
Wojciech Z. Kornacki of Watson & Associates LLC, Washington, DC; and Theodore
Watson of Watson & Associates LLC, Aurora, CO, counsel for Appellant.
Randal W. Wax, Office of the Legal Adviser, Buildings and Acquisitions, Department
of State, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
CHADWICK, Board Judge.
ORDER
On June 23, 2025, appellant moved to voluntarily dismiss this appeal with prejudice. 
Rule 12(b)(2) permits dismissal of an appeal with prejudice upon appellant’s motion.  48
CFR 6101.12(b)(2) (2024).  Respondent does not oppose appellant’s motion.  The motion
is granted, and this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
  Kyle Chadwick   
KYLE CHADWICK
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: June 4, 2019
CBCA 6141
XEROX CORPORATION,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
Donald J. Walsh of Wright, Constable & Skeen, LLP, Baltimore, MD, counsel for
Appellant.
Neil S. Deol, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Decatur,
GA; and Donald C. Moby, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Denver, CO, counsel for Respondent.
CHADWICK, Board Judge.
ORDER
The parties settled this case and jointly request dismissal with prejudice.  Accordingly,
the appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
  Kyle Chadwick             
KYLE CHADWICK
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: April 18, 2007 
CBCA 421, 422 
ARCH 1650 PARTNERS, LP, 
Appellant, 
v. 
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, 
Respondent. 
Richard J. Conway of Dickstein Shapiro LLP, Washington, DC, counsel for 
Appellant. 
Torrie N. Harris, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, 
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
DANIELS , Board Judge (Chairman). 
ORDER 
Arch 1650 Partners, LP (Arch) filed appeals challenging two decisions issued by a 
General Services Administration (GSA) contracting officer regarding adjustments to rental 
payments under contracts for the lease by Arch to GSA of property in Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania. 
The parties have informed the Board that they have settled their disputes and that 
consequent to the settlement, GSA has paid a sum of money to Arch.  The parties have asked 
the Board to dismiss the appeals with prejudice. 

_________________________ 
2 CBCA 421, 422 
Accordingly, the appeals are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
STEPHEN M. DANIELS 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  January 18, 2013
CBCA 2598
GARGOYLES, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
Respondent.
Kenneth A. Martin, Martin Law Firm, McLean, VA, counsel for Appellant.
Song Kim and Michael J. Davidson, Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE),
Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
ZISCHKAU, Board Judge.
ORDER
On January 8, 2013, the appellant, Gargoyles, Inc., filed a notice withdrawing its
appeal pursuant to a settlement reached between the parties.   Accordingly, we dismiss this
appeal with prejudice.
_________________________________
JONATHAN D. ZISCHKAU
Board Judge
GRANTED IN PART: January 4, 2011 
CBCA 1779 
NORTH WIND, INC., 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 
Respondent. 
Margaret B. Hinman of North Wind, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID, counsel for Appellant. 
Heather R. Hinton-Taylor, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture, 
Ogden, UT, counsel for Respondent. 
Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), BORWICK , and GOODMAN . 
DANIELS , Board Judge. 
The Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service contracted with North Wind, Inc. for 
reconstruction of the Little Mill Campground and North Mill Day Use Area in the Uinta 
National Forest, Utah. In performing this contract, North Wind used more fill material from 
outside the site (called “select borrow”) than specified in the contract or, the contractor says, 
than it could reasonably have expected to use. North Wind claimed reimbursement in the 
amount of $95,910 for the cost of the additional material and associated overhead. A Forest 
Service contracting officer denied the claim, and the contractor appealed. 
After the Board denied cross-motions for summary relief, North Wind, Inc. v. 
Department of Agriculture , CBCA 1779, 10-1 BCA ¶ 34,419, the parties requested that the 

 
            
            
            
     
               
               
              
               
                
  
              
             
      
_________________________ 
  
 
 
_________________________ _________________________ 
    
  
2 CBCA 1779 
presiding judge assist them in resolving the dispute by providing mediation services. 
Representatives of the parties and the judge walked through the campground, discussed the 
strengths and weaknesses of each side’s position, and, seated at campground picnic tables, 
came to agreement as to resolution. 
The Forest Service has agreed to pay to North Wind the sum of $12,372, and the 
parties have filed a joint stipulation that the Board issue a decision requiring the agency to 
pay an additional $25,628 to North Wind from the permanent indefinite judgment fund. The 
parties have stated that they will not seek reconsideration of, or relief from, a Board decision 
which directs this payment, and that they will not appeal such a decision. Rule 25(b) (48 
CFR 6101.25(b) (2009)). 
Decision 
The appeal is GRANTED IN PART . The Forest Service shall pay to North Wind, 
Inc. the sum of $25,628. This money shall be paid from the permanent indefinite judgment 
fund. 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2006). 
STEPHEN M. DANIELS 
Board Judge 
We concur: 
ANTHONY S. BORWICK ALLAN H. GOODMAN 
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: August 23, 2016
CBCA 5130
INTELLIGENT FISCAL OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Respondent.
Donald J. Walsh of Offit Kurman, P.A., Baltimore, MD, counsel for Appellant.
John R. Caterini and Barry C. Hansen, Office of General Counsel, Justice
Management Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman).
ORDER
Intelligent Fiscal Optimal Solutions, LLC, supplied administrative, budget, and
program support services to the Office of Violence Against Women at the Department of
Justice under a contract between the parties.  The agency demanded repayment of money it
had paid in response to an invoice, asserting that the services covered by the invoice had not
been provided under the contract.  The contractor appealed this determination.
The parties have settled this case and have jointly moved the Board to dismiss it with
prejudice.  


CBCA 5130 2
The motion is granted.  The case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
_________________________
STEPHEN M. DANIELS
Board Judge
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION: March 2, 2017
CBCA 5654
XCELERATED SUBSISTENCE SOLUTIONS,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Respondent.
A. Alan Weis, Managing Partner of Xcerlerated Subsistence Solutions, Hollywood,
FL, appearing for Appellant.
William Robinson and Nihar Vora, Office of General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons,
Department of Justice, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges DRUMMOND, ZISCHKAU, and O’ROURKE.
DRUMMOND, Board Judge.
Appellant filed this appeal on February 17, 2017, from respondent’s decision to
terminate a purchase order to supply certified religious foods.  In its notice of appeal,
appellant alleged that it is entitled to damages totaling $15,000. 
           During a telephonic conference on February 27, 2017, the parties agreed that the
appeal is jurisdictionally deficient because no claim has been filed and no final decision has
been issued by the contracting officer.  A prerequisite to Board jurisdiction is a contracting
officer’s final decision on a claim.  Sharp Electronics Corp. v. McHugh, 707 F.3d 1367, 1371
(Fed. Cir. 2013).  Without the filing of a claim and the issuance of a final decision (or the
failure to issue such a decision within the prescribed period of time), this Board lacks
jurisdiction.  Energx, LLC v. Department of Energy, CBCA 3060, slip op. at 2 (January 25,

CBCA 5654 2
2017);  Macrosystems v. General Services Administration, CBCA 2158, 11-1 BCA ¶ 34,622,
at 170,618 (2010).
Decision
The appeal is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
____________________________
JEROME M. DRUMMOND
Board Judge
We Concur:
_____________________________ ______________________________
JONATHAN D. ZISCHKAU KATHLEEN J. O’ROURKE
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: October 18, 2022
CBCA 7238
RCR PROPERTIES,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
Diana Parks and Hadeel N. Masseoud of Curran Legal Services Group, Inc., Marietta,
GA, counsel for Appellant.
Laetitia Coleman, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Arlington, TX; and Mary A. Mitchell, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans
Affairs, Houston, TX, counsel for Respondent.
CHADWICK, Board Judge.
ORDER
The parties settled this case and jointly request dismissal with prejudice.  Accordingly,
the appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
     Kyle Chadwick               
KYLE CHADWICK
Board Judge
MOTION FOR RECUSAL, RECONSIDERATION, AND 
REHEARING DENIED:  August 21, 2009 
CBCA 1002-R 
CORNERS AND EDGES, INC., 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 
Respondent. 
John E. Larson of Corners and Edges, Inc., Hamilton, MT, appearing for 
Appellant. 
Daniel J. Barry and Mogbeyi E. Omatete, Office of the General Counsel, 
Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
Before Board Judges BORWICK, McCANN , and DRUMMOND . 
BORWICK, Board Judge. 
Appellant has moved for recusal of the judges on the panel in this appeal, and 
reconsideration and rehearing of our decision dismissing the case on res judicata grounds. 
We deny the motion. 
Background 
The Board dismissed this appeal on the ground of res judicata, because the same 
claim had been previously decided and denied by the Armed Services Board of Contract 
Appeals (ASBCA).  Corners and Edges, Inc. v. Department of Health and Human 

 
 
 
  
 
_______________________________ 
_______________________________ ________________________________ 
2 CBCA 1002-R 
Services , CBCA 1002, 09-2 BCA ¶ 34,140.  Appellant now seeks recusal of the panel 
involved in CBCA 1002.  As grounds for recusal, appellant alleges that in an entirely 
different set of consolidated appeals--CBCA 693, 762, and 1322, involving a different 
contract and two different panelists--but with the same panel chair--the Board instructed 
the court reporters to “delete certain words at the hearing and to add words that were 
never spoken at the hearing.”  Appellant accuses both the court reporting company and 
the Board of tampering with the transcript.  Appellant’s Motion at 3.  
As for reconsideration, appellant alleges that the ASBCA’s decision is flawed.  It 
alleges that the ASBCA should not have considered the appeal on a deemed denial basis, 
which appellant called “an obvious and known adjudicative error of the ASBCA.” 
Appellant’s Motion at 2.  Consequently, appellant argues that the ASBCA decision 
should not be given res judicata effect.  Id. at 2-3. 
Discussion 
Appellant’s basis for recusal is completely unfounded.  Appellant’s allegations 
deserve no further response.  
As for reconsideration, appellant raises issues that were discussed at length in the 
original opinion, and simply reargues points that the Board has considered and rejected. 
Corners and Edges, Inc ., 09-2 BCA at 168,781-82.  Appellant has not met the test for 
reconsideration set forth in Board Rule 26, 48 CFR 6101.26 (2008)).  Tidewater 
Contractors, Inc. v. Department of Transportation, CBCA 50-R, 07-2 BCA ¶ 33,618, at 
166,501.  
Decision 
Appellant’s motion for recusal, reconsideration, and rehearing is DENIED . 
ANTHONY S. BORWICK 
Board Judge 
We concur: 

CBCA 1002-R 3 
R. ANTHONY McCANN JEROME M. DRUMMOND 
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: April 4, 2018
CBCA 5917
MINBURN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
G. Matthew Koehl of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Washington, DC, counsel
for Appellant.
David W. Altieri, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Syracuse, NY; and Donald C. Mobly, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans
Affairs, Denver, CO, counsel for Respondent.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
ORDER
On April 3, 2018, the parties advised the Board that they had reached a settlement and
requested that this appeal be dismissed.  Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
______________________
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  September 28, 2017
CBCA 5566
INDUS CORPORATION, 
Appellant,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
John R. Tolle of Baker, Cronogue, Tolle & Werfel, LLP, McLean, VA, counsel for
Appellant.
Sara E. McGraw and Kenneth R. Pakula, Office of General Counsel, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
LESTER, Board Judge. 
ORDER
On September 27, 2017, the parties filed a joint request to dismiss this appeal with
prejudice, notifying the Board that they have settled their dispute.  The parties’ request is
granted.  This appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
_________________________________
HAROLD D. LESTER, JR. 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: June 4, 2019
CBCA 5076
RLS CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
Casey J. McKinnon of Cohen Seglias Pallas Greenhall & Furman, P.C., Washington,
DC; and Lane F. Kelman, Roy S. Cohen, and Michael Metz-Topodas of  Cohen Seglias
Pallas Greenhall & Furman, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, counsel for Appellant.
Jennifer L. Hedge, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Pittsburgh, PA, counsel for Respondent.
SULLIVAN, Board Judge.
ORDER
The Board is in receipt of the parties’ joint stipulation of dismissal, filed on
June 3, 2019, in the above-referenced case.  The parties have fulfilled their settlement
obligations and request that the Board dismiss this appeal with prejudice. 


CBCA 5076 2
In accordance with the parties’ request, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.  
   Marian E. Sullivan          
MARIAN E. SULLIVAN
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  October 8, 2009  
CBCA 1293
 
STEELE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,
 
Appellant, 
v. 
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, 
Respondent. 
C. J. Steele, President of Steele & Associates, Inc., Alpharetta, GA, appearing for 
Appellant. 
Joel David Malkin, Assistant Regional Counsel, General Services Administration, 
Chicago, IL, counsel for Respondent. 
POLLACK, Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On October 6, 2009, the Board received a letter from counsel for the Government 
advising and providing confirmation that payment had been made to appellant in settlement 
of the appeal. The parties had earlier executed a Settlement Agreement and Joint Stipulation 
to Dismiss that had set out as a condition for dismissal proof of payment of the settlement 

________________________________ 
2 CBCA 1293 
amount.  Accordingly, now that payment has been made, the appeal is DISMISSED WITH 
PREJUDICE in accordance with the prior agreement of the parties. 
HOWARD A. POLLACK 
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: March 19, 2010 
CBCA 1392 
SANDIA CORPORATION, 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, 
Respondent. 
Mark J. Meagher and Tyson J. Bareis of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, Denver, 
CO, counsel for Appellant. 
Cynthia R. Wimberly, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of 
Energy, Albuquerque, NM, counsel for Respondent. 
KULLBERG, Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On October 28, 2008, the Board docketed the appeal of Sandia Corporation.  
On March 12, 2010, the parties jointly advised the Board that they had reached a 
settlement and requested that this appeal be dismissed with prejudice. 

______________________ 
2 CBCA 1392 
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
H. CHUCK KULLBERG 
Board Judge
______________________________ 
  
 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: May 19, 2011 
CBCA 1928 
AHTNA ENTERPRISES CORPORATION, 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 
Respondent. 
Michael C. Geraghty of DeLisio Moran Geraghty & Zobel, P.C., Anchorage, AK, 
counsel for Appellant. 
Stephen R. Palmer, Office of the Regional Solicitor, Department of the Interior, 
Sacramento, CA, counsel for Respondent. 
STERN , Board Judge. 
ORDER 
Ahtna Enterprises Corporation (appellant) moves to dismiss the appeal on the basis 
that the parties have resolved all issues and have settled the appeal. The motion to dismiss 
is granted. The appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
JAMES L. STERN 
Board Judge
______________________________ 
  
 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: November 22, 2011 
CBCA 2274 
INFORMED EDUCATORS CONSULTING GROUP, LLC, 
Appellant, 
v.
 
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
 
Respondent. 
John B. Wells, Slidell, LA, counsel for Appellant. 
Peter Fondry, Office of the Solicitor, Department of the Interior, Albuquerque, NM, 
counsel for Respondent. 
VERGILIO , Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On January 24, 2011, the Board received from Informed Educators Consulting Group, 
LLC (contractor) a timely-filed notice of appeal, docketed as CBCA 2274, concerning a 
denial of its claim arising under a contract, CBQ9080012, with the Department of the Interior 
(agency). In particular, the contractor seeks $141,229.98 for unpaid invoices. The parties 
have worked together to focus and resolve this dispute. By submission dated November 22, 
2011, the contractor states that this matter is resolved and requests a dismissal with prejudice. 
The Board DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE this appeal. 
JOSEPH A. VERGILIO 
Board Judge
GRANTED IN PART: November 6, 2020
CBCA 6504
1101 WILSON OWNER, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
Seamus Curley of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, Washington, DC, counsel for
Appellant.
James Scott and Jessica Gunzel, Office of General Counsel, General Services
Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges BEARDSLEY, ZISCHKAU, and CHADWICK. 
BEARDSLEY, Board Judge.
Respondent, the General Services Administration, offset the amount of $42,877.04
from its lease payment to appellant, 1101 Wilson Owner, LLC, to recoup real estate taxes
GSA alleged it had wrongly paid.  Appellant has moved for summary judgment in the
amount of the offset claiming that the government’s right to offset is barred by the Contract
Dispute Act’s (CDA) six-year statute of limitations, 41 U.S.C. § 7103(a)(4)(A) (2018). 
Appellant also moved for an award of interest in the amount of $1719.85 from the date of
the offset until November 14, 2018, the date appellant submitted its CDA claim.  


CBCA 6504 2
GSA does not oppose this motion, except to challenge appellant’s claim for $1719.85
in other than CDA interest.1  GSA states that it cannot produce any documentary evidence
that a contracting officer asserted a claim to withhold the funds and resolve the issues of tax
liability and of damages within the CDA limitations period.  Based on the Board’s decision
in 1000-1100 Wilson Owner, LLC v. General Services Administration, CBCA 6506, 20-1
BCA ¶ 37,642, which involved almost identical facts to this case, GSA’s claim for
$42,877.04 is, therefore, barred by the CDA statute of limitations.  
Decision
The Board GRANTS IN PART appellant’s motion for summary judgment and enters
judgment for appellant in the amount of $42,877.04, plus CDA interest to run from
November 14, 2018.  Only appellant’s claim for other than CDA interest remains to be
decided in this appeal.
 
    Erica S. Beardsley          
ERICA S. BEARDSLEY
Board Judge
We concur:
  Jonathan D. Zischkau         Kyle Chadwick               
JONATHAN D. ZISCHKAU KYLE CHADWICK
Board Judge Board Judge
1  The parties are currently briefing for the Board the issue of appellant’s
entitlement to other than CDA interest.
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION: May 15, 2020
CBCA 6806
MAVIGA N.A. INC.,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Respondent.
Donald J. Driscoll, Director and Officer of Maviga N.A. Inc., Spokane, WA,
appearing for Appellant.
Azine Farzami, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture,
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges BEARDSLEY, VERGILIO, and SHERIDAN.
VERGILIO, Board Judge.
Maviga N.A. Inc. (Maviga) has filed an appeal contesting the determination of the
Department of Agriculture to award a contract to other than Maviga in response to a
solicitation. Maviga acknowledges that, as an unsuccessful bidder, it lacks a contract with
the Government regarding this matter. The parties have had an opportunity to comment on
jurisdiction.
Maviga is not a contractor under the definition in the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C.
§ 7101(7) (2018) (“The term ‘contractor’ means a party to a Federal Government contract
other than the Federal Government.”). Jurisdiction is conferred by statute. That jurisdiction


CBCA 6806 2
does not include authority to resolve this case brought by an unsuccessful bidder, an entity
other than a contractor. 41 U.S.C. §§ 7102(a), 7105(e)(1)(b);Coastal Corp. v. United States,
713 F.2d 728 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Neither a contracting officer (by issuing a protest decision
that identifies the Board as the forum to hear an appeal of that determination) nor an
unsuccessful bidder (by requesting that the Board resolve the dispute) can confer jurisdiction
upon this Board.
Decision
The case is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
Joseph A. Vergilio
JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
Board Judge
We concur:
Erica S. Beardsley Patricia J. Sheridan
ERICA S. BEARDSLEY PATRICIA J. SHERIDAN
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  April 19, 2023
CBCA 7468
4K GLOBAL-ACC JOINT VENTURE, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondent.
Lochlin B. Samples, Karl F. Dix, Jr., Jonathan R. Mayo, and Jeanne M. Harrison of
Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP, Atlanta, GA; and Alexander Gorelik of Smith, Currie &
Hancock LLP, Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant.
José Otero, Joshua L. Caplan, C. Cleveland Fairchild, Christopher L. Sanders, and
Sejal Singh, Office of the Solicitor, Department of Labor, Washington, DC, counsel for
Respondent.
LESTER, Board Judge.
ORDER
On April 17, 2023, the parties, representing that they have settled their underlying
dispute, filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal.  In accordance with the parties’ request,
this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
    Harold D. Lester, Jr.      
HAROLD D. LESTER, JR.
Board Judge
GRANTED IN PART: February 15, 2017
CBCA 5629
HATHAWAY DINWIDDIE CONSTRUCTION CO.,
Appellant,
v.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
Philip E. Fagone, Belmont, CA, counsel for Appellant.
Jay Bernstein, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration,
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges VERGILIO, KULLBERG, and SULLIVAN.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
On February 10, 2017, the parties submitted to the Board a joint motion for judgment
on a stipulated settlement.  The parties requested that the Board enter judgment in the amount
of $4,600,000, with payment to be made through the judgment fund in accordance with
31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2012) and 41 U.S.C. § 7108.  Rule 25(b) (48 CFR 6101.25(b)
(2015)).  The parties have agreed that they will not seek appeal of, reconsideration of, or
relief from the Board’s decision, and that each party will be responsible for its costs, attorney
fees, and expenses incurred in the litigation of this appeal. 


CBCA 5629 2
Decision
The Board GRANTS IN PART the appeal.  In accordance with the parties’ joint
motion, the Board awards appellant the stipulated settlement amount of
$4,600,000.  Rule 25(b). 
______________________
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
We concur:
_______________________ _______________________
JOSEPH A. VERGILIO MARIAN E. SULLIVAN
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  March 9, 2026
CBCA 8289
INTEGRATED CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
Sid Raman, President of Integrated Construction Enterprises, Inc., Belleville, NJ,
appearing for Appellant.
Richard O. Hughes, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration,
New York, NY, counsel for Respondent.
ZISCHKAU, Board Judge.
ORDER
On March 9, 2026, the parties filed a joint request for dismissal of this appeal in light
of their resolution of the dispute.  The Board commends the parties on the successful
settlement of this matter.  Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
   Jonathan D. Zischkau   
JONATHAN D. ZISCHKAU
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  April 28, 2016
CBCA 3407, 4173, 4338, 4908
GROUP HEALTH INCORPORATED,
Appellant in CBCA 3407, 4173, and 4908,
and
DOUGLAS CONSULTING AND COMPUTER SERVICES, INC.,
Appellant in CBCA 4338,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Daniel P. Graham and Elizabeth Krabill McIntyre of Vinson & Elkins LLP,
Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant in CBCA 3407, 4173, and 4908.
Karen L. Manos of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, Washington, DC, counsel for
Appellant in CBCA 4338.
Jeffri Pierre and Anthony Marrone, Office of the General Counsel, Department of
Health and Human Services, Baltimore, MD, counsel for Respondent.
GOODMAN, Board Judge.


CBCA 3407, 4173, 4338, 4908 2
ORDER
On April 15, 2016, counsel for appellant Group Health Incorporated and respondent
filed a joint motion to dismiss these consolidated appeals with prejudice.1  On April 27, 2016,
counsel for appellant Douglas Consulting and Computer Services, Inc. filed a concurrence
with the joint motion to dismiss with prejudice.  The motion is granted, and these appeals are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
__________________________
ALLAN H. GOODMAN
Board Judge
1  During a conference call with the Board on April 21, 2016, counsel for appellant
Group Health Incorporated and respondent withdrew their request that the Board adopt their
joint stipulation of settlement as a decision by the Board pursuant to CBCA Rule 25 (b).
GRANTED IN PART: October 6, 2015
CBCA 3786, 3977
R.E.M. ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
Sarah C. Schauerte of Legal Meets Practical, LLC, Roswell, GA; and David S.
Milton, Pasadena, CA, counsel for Appellant.
Charlma Quarles, Eyvonne Mallett, and Helen Hemmingsen, Office of General
Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges SOMERS, HYATT, and KULLBERG.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
On September 21, 2015, the parties submitted to the Board a joint stipulation of
settlement and motion for judgment.  The parties requested that the Board enter judgment for
appellant in the amount of $3,050,000, and that payment be made through the judgment fund
in accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2012) and 41 U.S.C. § 7108.  The parties have agreed
that they will not seek reconsideration of, or relief from, the Board’s decision, and each party
will be responsible for its costs, attorney fees, and expenses incurred in the litigation of this
appeal. 


CBCA 3786, 3977 2
Decision
The Board GRANTS IN PART the appeal.  The Department of Veterans Affairs shall
pay appellant the sum of $3,050,000.  Payment is to be made from the judgment fund. 
31 U.S.C. § 1304; 41 U.S.C. § 7108.
______________________
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
We concur:
_______________________ _______________________
JERI KAYLENE SOMERS CATHERINE B. HYATT
Board Judge Board Judge
GRANTED IN PART:  August 8, 2008 
CBCA 154, 156, 157 
SCOTT TIMBER COMPANY, 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 
Respondent. 
Richard W. Goeken and Alan I. Saltman of Saltman & Stevens, P.C., Washington, 
DC, counsel for Appellant. 
Brian J. Perron, Office of the Solicitor, Department of the Interior, Portland, OR, 
counsel for Respondent. 
Before Board Judges BORWICK, STERN, and STEEL . 
STEEL , Board Judge. 
These appeals , which arise out of three timber sale contracts between Scott Timber 
Company and the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM), were 
originally filed at the Department of the Interior Board of Contract Appeals.  The matters 
were transferred to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals and docketed as CBCA 154, 156, 
and 157 upon consolidation of the civilian agency boards of contract appeals.  See  Pub.L. No. 
109-163, § 847, 119 Stat. 3136 (2006). The cases have been in suspense since October 2006 
while the parties have engaged in ongoing settlement negotiations. 
By letter of July 30, 2008, the parties notified the Board that they had entered into a 
settlement agreement dated July 28, 2008. The parties have stipulated that the Scott Timber 
Company is the prevailing party in these matters and that BLM shall pay the sum of $955,831 

  
 
  
 
 
CBCA 154, 156 , 157  2 
plus applicable Contract Disputes Act interest calculated from November 10, 1994 to Scott 
Timber Company via electronic funds transfer (EFT), plus pay Scott Timber Company via 
EFT  $16,936 not subject to Contract Disputes Act interest, plus provide other valuable 
consideration as set forth in the settlement agreement.  The parties additionally stipulated that 
the decision of the Board would be final and binding upon the parties and not subject to 
further appeal.  Each party agreed to bear its own costs and attorney fees. 
Decision 
Accordingly, the appeals are GRANTED IN PART . In accordance with the parties’ 
settlement agreement, the Board awards the sum of $955,831 plus interest on said amount 
under the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 611 (2000), beginning November 10, 1994. 
In addition, the Board awards the sum of $16,936 without interest.  Payment is to be made 
from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. § 1304.  
______________________________ 
CANDIDA S. STEEL 
Board Judge 
We concur: 
_______________________________ _______________________________ 
JAMES L. STERN ANTHONY S. BORWICK 
Board Judge Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: January 29, 2014
CBCA 2686-R, 3527, 3550
BANNUM, INC.,
                                                   Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
                                                     Respondent.
Joseph A. Camardo, Jr., and Justin T. Huffman of Camardo Law Firm, P.C., Auburn,
NY, counsel for Appellant.
William D. Robinson and Seth M. Bogin, Office of General Counsel, Federal Bureau
of Prisons, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
WALTERS, Board Judge.
ORDER
The consolidated appeals were the subject of an alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
proceeding, in which Judge Walters served as the parties’ neutral.  A settlement was
achieved, and the parties, by joint status report and motion to dismiss with prejudice, advise
that full final payment of the settlement amount has been received.  Accordingly, the appeals
hereby are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
_______________________
RICHARD C. WALTERS
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: August 15, 2017
CBCA 5525
VERIZON FEDERAL,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
Respondent.
John S. Pachter, Armani Vadiee, and Todd M. Garland of Smith Pachter McWhorter
PLC, Tysons Corner, VA, counsel for Appellant.
William H. Butterfield, Office of Procurement Law, Judge Advocate General, United
States Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, counsel for
Respondent.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
ORDER
On August 14, 2017, the parties advised the Board that they had reached a settlement
and requested that this appeal be dismissed.  Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
______________________
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: February 21, 2014
CBCA 3390, 3420
WESTEK FOREST LTD.,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Respondent.
Ben D. Cushman and Jon E. Cushman of Cushman Law Offices, P.S., Olympia, WA,
counsel for Appellant.
Zoey L. Kohn, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture, Portland,
OR, counsel for Respondent.
VERGILIO, Board Judge.
ORDER
On May 29, 2013, and June 12, 2013, the Board received and docketed notices of
appeal from Westek Forest Ltd (contractor) concerning its contracts, AG-05G2-C-11-0035
and AG-05G2-C-11-0045, respectively, with the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
(agency) to repair portions of roads.  The parties used alternative dispute resolution
proceedures to resolve the disputes.  On February 20, 2014, the parties submitted stipulations,
jointly moving that all claims between the parties be dismissed with prejudice and without
costs to either party.  In accordance with the stipulations, the Board hereby DISMISSES
WITH PREJUDICE these appeals.
______________________________
JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
Board Judge
______________________________ 
  
 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: October 1, 2010 
CBCA 1541 
XEROX CAPITAL SERVICES, LLC, 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 
Respondent. 
Richard D. Lieberman and Gabriel D. Soll of McCarthy, Sweeney & Harkaway, PC, 
Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant. 
Ronald D. Sullivan, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, 
Austin, TX, counsel for Respondent. 
VERGILIO , Board Judge. 
ORDER 
On March 24, 2009, the Board received from Xerox Capital Services, LLC 
(contractor) a notice of appeal, docketed as CBCA 1541, concerning a deemed denial of a 
claim relating to an unpaid contractor invoice arising under delivery orders issued by the 
respondent, the Department of Veterans Affairs, pursuant to the contractor’s contract, GS 
25F 0062L, with the General Services Administration. On September 30, 2010, the Board 
received a request for a dismissal with prejudice; the parties have settled this dispute. 
The Board DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE this appeal. 
JOSEPH A. VERGILIO 
Board Judge
DISMISSED:  May 30, 2013
CBCA 2896
C. MARTIN COMPANY, INC., 
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
Respondent.
John G. Stafford, Jr. of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Washington, DC, and Dorn C.
McGrath III and William M. Jack of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Washington, DC, 
counsel for Appellant.
Jean Hardin, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC; and Janice L. Kazmier, Office of
Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security, New Orleans, LA, counsel for Respondent.
BORWICK, Board Judge.
ORDER
On May 29, 2013, appellant advised the Board that the appeal has been settled and
submitted a motion to dismiss.  Pursuant to Rule 12(c), the appeal is DISMISSED.  
___________________________
ANTHONY S. BORWICK
Board Judge


CBCA 2896 2
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: January 6, 2010 
CBCA 1598 
V.I.C. ENTERPRISES, INC., 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 
Respondent. 
Victor S. Carlson, President of V.I.C. Enterprises, Inc., Willow, AK, appearing for 
Appellant. 
Glen Woodworth, Office of Regional Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, 
Anchorage, AK; and Anna Maddan, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Veterans
 
Affairs, Palm Desert, CA, counsel for Respondent.
 
SHERIDAN , Board Judge.
 
ORDER 
On January 5, 2010, the parties informed the Board that the case had been resolved 
and jointly moved that the appeal be dismissed in its entirety with prejudice.  
Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
PATRICIA J. SHERIDAN 
Board Judge
GRANTED IN PART: December 16, 2014
CBCA 2947
XEROX CORPORATION,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Jonathan S. Aronie, Louis D. Victorino, and Ryan E. Roberts of Sheppard, Mullin,
Richter & Hampton LLP, Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant.
Jason A. Blindauer and Christopher M. Johnson, Office of the General Counsel,
Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges GOODMAN, DRUMMOND, and SHERIDAN.
DRUMMOND, Board Judge.
The above-captioned appeal was filed on August 24, 2012, and involves a certified
claim by Xerox for unpaid invoices.  
On December 12, 2014, the parties filed a joint motion for entry of decision by
stipulation, which states in relevant part:


CBCA 2947 2
As of December 11, 2014, the parties reached a
settlement regarding Xerox’s appealed claim;
By executing their Settlement Agreement and filing this
Motion, the parties hereby stipulate to a Decision by the Board
awarding eighty six thousand, six hundred and twenty two
dollars, and forty cents ($86,622.40) to Xerox, as payee; and
The parties further stipulate as follows: (a) they will not
seek reconsideration of, or relief from, the Board’s decision; (b)
they will not appeal the decision; and (c) they understand that
the Board’s decision pursuant to this joint motion is an
adjudication of the case on the merits. 
Decision
Pursuant to the agreement of the parties and Rule 25(b), the Board adopts the parties’
joint motion for entry of decision by stipulation, and in accordance with the parties’
settlement agreement, the Board enters judgement as requested.  This appeal is GRANTED
IN PART in the amount of $86,622.40, inclusive of interest and costs, to be paid in
accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2012). 
__________________________
JEROME M. DRUMMOND
Board Judge
We concur:
_______________________________ _____________________________
ALLAN H. GOODMAN PATRICIA J. SHERIDAN
Board Judge Board Judge