CBCA 2414, 2657

Proteus, INC.

Jan 14, 2014Judge WaltersDEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Not published in the listingGranted in partby agreement

Key Facts

Appellant
Proteus, INC.
Respondent agency
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Judge
Walters
Case number
CBCA 2414, 2657This cell names 2 dockets: 2414, 2657.
Decided
Jan 14, 2014The decision states Jan 14, 2014 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Not published in the listingThe Board's year tables for 2007 through 2014 carry no Type column, so no disposition was published for this decision. It is not missing data and nothing is inferred from the document.
Law firm for the appellant
Braude Law Group, P.C.
Outcome
Granted in partEntered by agreement of the parties.
Pursuant to the parties' joint motion and Board Rule 25b, these appeals are GRANTED IN PART.
Read from the shouted disposition line the Board prints above this decision's own date, and quoted from its operative sentence above. No model is involved.

Topics

The topic rules ran over this decision's own words and none of them matched.

Topics are derived from each decision's own text by keyword rules, not a classification by the Board. A decision matching several topics carries all of them, so topic counts sum above the number of decisions.

Appearances

For the appellant
Herman M. Braude
Braude Law Group, P.C.
Washington, DC
For the respondent
Ricarto Brazela
Office of the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs
Washington, DC
Decision PDF (cbca.gov) Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act casesThe Board's year listing this row was read fromThe decision document is hosted by the Board itself, so it is an official copy, and the Board's own Contract Disputes Act case listing is the citable source. The topics, the disposition and the appearances above are read deterministically from the decision's own words; no model is involved.

Research This Decision

Create a free account to open this decision in the CBCA workspace: a grounded decision brief drafted from the Board's own words, the Insights dashboard over the whole corpus, and the filtered browser.

CBCA Decision Brief

A Workflows Hub brief on this decision, drafted from the captured text with every quote and authority checked against it.

Insights

Who prevails before the Board, by topic and by judge, with every denominator visible: merits rulings, not decisions.

Browse with Filters

The whole corpus by year, decision type, topic, judge and disposition, searchable across the decisions' own text.

Full Decision

Full text of the decision2 pages, 2,386 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Jan 14, 2014 on its own faceRespondent DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

2 authorities read from this decision's own text, grouped by the body of law each comes from. Select one to read it at its publisher.

Contract Disputes Act1
Other statutes1

Read from the decision's own words with no model involved. Statutes, regulations, the acts these forums argue by name, and cases at the board, this office or the Comptroller General are recognized; any other citation form is left out rather than guessed at, so this is a floor on what the decision cites.

GRANTED IN PART: January 14, 2014

CBCA 2414, 2657

PROTEUS, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Respondent.

Herman M. Braude of Braude Law Group, P.C., Washington, DC, counsel for

Appellant.

The case caption as the decision prints it. Every word is kept; the rule the Board draws around it is not text, so it is not repeated here.

Ricarto Brazela, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges SOMERS, McCANN, and WALTERS.

WALTERS, Board Judge.

These appeals are currently before the Board on a joint motion for judgment on a stipulated settlement. The appeals relate to a claim submitted by the appellant, Proteus, Inc. (Proteus), in connection with its performance of task orders 3 and 4 under contract number V101BC with the respondent, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The task orders involved a sidewalk subsidence project at the VA Medical Center in Baltimore, Maryland. On January 8, 2014, the parties stipulated to an award by this Board to Proteus in the amount of $650,000 in full settlement of the claim and the appeals. By their joint motion, the parties stipulated further that interest on such amount will begin to accrue on April 9, 2014, at the interest rate(s) published by the Secretary of the Treasury for purposes of the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), should payment of the judgment amount not be made by April 8, 2014, and that such interest shall be paid to Proteus along with the payment of the stipulated judgment award. Finally, the parties stipulated that neither party will seek reconsideration of, or relief from, the Board’s decision and that neither party will appeal the Board’s decision.

Decision

Pursuant to the parties’ joint motion and Board Rule 25b, these appeals are GRANTED IN PART. In accordance with the parties’ stipulation of settlement and joint motion, the Board awards the appellant the sum of $650,000 for all claims under the appeals; payment is to be made from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2006). Interest on said sum shall begin to accrue on April 9, 2014, at the interest rate(s) published by the Secretary of the Treasury semi-annually for purposes of the CDA, should payment of the award not be made by April 8, 2014, and shall be paid to the appellant together with the award.

_____________________________

RICHARD C. WALTERS

Board Judge

We concur:

JERI K. SOMERS

Board Judge

R. ANTHONY McCANN

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Proteus, INC., CBCA 2414, 2657. Nothing is summarized or reworded, and the sections run in the order the Board wrote them. What the page shows and the text does not repeat is the pagination furniture: the page numbers and the rules the Board draws around its caption and under its signatures. The signatures are set back into the columns the Board prints them in, each judge under the name he or she signed, and the typed copy of that name the page carries beneath each signature is not repeated.

Related Decisions

Same Judge

Same Year

Newsletter

New decisions every Monday

GovConDash Weekly lists the decisions GAO, the boards, the courts and SBA OHA released that week, alongside the FAR Overhaul deviations and proposed rules that reach every contractor. Free.

Free, weekly, and one click to unsubscribe. We send a confirmation email first. See our Privacy Policy.