Case Name: AVTEL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and King Aerospace, Inc., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-08-21
Citations: 501 F.3d 1259
Docket Number: No. 2006-5060
Parties: AVTEL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and King Aerospace, Inc., Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before NEWMAN, RADER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 501
Pages: 1259–1263

Head Matter:
AVTEL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and King Aerospace, Inc., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 2006-5060.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Aug. 21, 2007.
Rehearing En Banc Denied Oct. 18, 2007.
Howell Roger Riggs, Dick, Riggs, Miller & Stem, LLP, of Huntsville, Alabama, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were David H. Stem, Jr., and Patrick O. Miller. Of counsel was Timothy Paul Pittman.
Elizabeth A. Holt, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee, United States. With her on the brief was Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, and Todd M. Hughes, Assistant Director.
Marshall J. Doke, Jr., Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP, of Dallas, Texas, argued for defendant-appellee, King Aerospace, Inc. With him on the brief was Stacy R. Oben-haus.
Before NEWMAN, RADER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge NEWMAN.
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Avtel Services, Inc. (Avtel) seeks a re-solicitation or reevaluation of a contract that was awarded to King Aerospace, Inc. by the United States. This court only possesses jurisdiction over Avtel's appeal if it can be awarded the relief it seeks. Avtel has made a general assignment to another party to liquidate its assets and distribute the proceeds to creditors and admits that it does not have the resources necessary to perform the contract.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction based on Avtel's bankruptcy status.