MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED:  May 25, 2010 
CBCA 1852 
GEO-IMAGING CONSULTING, INC., 
Appellant, 
v. 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, 
Respondent. 
Rosemarie Onwukwe, President of Geo-Imaging Consulting, Inc., Washington, DC
 appearing for Appellant. 
Sara E. McGraw, Office of General Counsel, Environmental Protection Agency, 
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
Before Board Judges HYATT , McCANN , and SHERIDAN . 
SHERIDAN , Board Judge. 
Pending before the Board is a motion by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 
respondent, to dismiss CBCA 1852 for failure to prosecute.  After considering respondent’s 
motion, the motion is denied. 
Background 
This appeal was docketed on January 6, 2010, and pleadings were filed.  On April 21, 
2010, appellant’s counsel withdrew from the proceedings.  A telephone conference was 

     
   
  
 
  
     
  
     
      
   
 
2CBCA 1852 
conducted between the presiding judge, Rosemarie Onwukwe, and EPA counsel, on April 
21, 2010. 1 Ms. Onwukwe represented herself as the president of Geo-Imaging Consulting, 
Inc. (Geo-Imaging).  During that conference, Ms. Onwukwe was instructed to file a notice 
of appearance with the Board and was informed that, as per the Board’s order of April 13, 
2010, appellant’s appeal file supplement was due on May 11, 2010. 
On May 6, 2010, the Board received a facsimile transmission noting that Rosemarie 
Onwukwe would be the contact person for Geo-Imaging. It does not appear that Geo-
Imaging provided this document to EPA. To this date, no appeal file supplement has been 
submitted to the Board.  On May 12, 2010, EPA filed a motion to dismiss CBCA 1852 for 
failure to prosecute. 
Discussion 
Board Rule 33(c) provides: 
When a party or its representative or attorney or any expert/consultant fails to 
comply with any direction or order issued by the Board (including an order to 
provide or permit discovery), or engages in misconduct affecting the Board, 
its process, or its proceedings, the Board may make such orders as are just, 
including the imposition of appropriate sanctions. The sanctions may include: 
. . . . 
(3) Refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose designated 
claims or defenses; 
(4) Prohibiting the disobedient party from introducing in evidence designated 
documents or items of testimony; 
. . . . 
(6) Dismissing the case or any part thereof; 
. . . .; or 
(8) Imposing such other sanctions as the Board deems appropriate. 
1   Other individuals were involved in the telephone conference but are not pertinent 
to this decision. 

    
  
           
    
  
                                                             
                                                                                                                            
3 CBCA 1852 
48 CFR 6101.33(c) (2009). 
This Board recently dismissed an appeal for an appellant’s failure to prosecute in 
CCJN & Co., Architects & Planners, P.C. v. General Services Administration, where  we 
noted that: 
As [Rule 33(c)] makes clear, the Board has the power to dismiss a case for 
failure to prosecute. This sanction is reserved for egregious situations, where 
the party has repeatedly failed to comply with the tribunal’s orders.  Willful 
disobedience of orders and prejudice to the opposing party have generally been 
found to be sufficient reasons for dismissing a case for failure to prosecute. 
Medtek, Inc. v. Department of Veterans Affairs , CBCA 1544, 09-2 BCA 
¶ 34,285 (citing Griffin & Dickson v. United States , 16 Cl. Ct. 347, 351-52 
(1989); Corners and Edges, Inc. v. Department of Health & Human Services , 
CBCA 1322, 09-1 BCA ¶ 34,051; see also Pacific Wildfire, LLC v. 
Department of Agriculture , CBCA 664, 08-2 BCA ¶ 33,954. 
CBCA 821, et al., slip op. at 6 (Apr. 21, 2010). 
At this point, Geo-Imaging has not repeatedly failed to comply with the Board’s 
orders and its failures have not risen to the level of an egregious situation.  Given the facts, 
no sanctions are appropriate at this time. 
Decision 
EPA’s motion to dismiss CBCA 1852 for failure to prosecute is DENIED . 
PATRICIA J. SHERIDAN 
Board Judge 
We concur: 
CATHERINE B. HYATT R. ANTHONY McCANN 
Board Judge Board Judge