CBCA 5700

Oneida Communications, Inc.

Nov 17, 2017Judge SomersDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
DecisionGranted in partby agreement

Key Facts

Appellant
Oneida Communications, Inc.
Respondent agency
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Judge
Somers
Case number
CBCA 5700
Decided
Nov 17, 2017The decision states Nov 17, 2017 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Decision
Law firm for the appellant
PilieroMazza PLLC
Outcome
Granted in partEntered by agreement of the parties.
Pursuant to the parties' joint motion and Board Rule 25(b) (48 CFR 6101.25(b)(2016), this appeal is GRANTED.
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
Nichole D. Atallah and Patrick E. Rothwell and Sarah L. Nash
PilieroMazza PLLC
Washington, DC
For the respondent
Brian C. Caney
Office of the General Counsel, Department of Health and Human Services
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, 1,917 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Nov 17, 2017 on its own faceRespondent DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

3 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.

Agency FAR supplements1

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: November 17, 2017

CBCA 5700

ONEIDA COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

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.

Nichole D. Atallah, Patrick E. Rothwell, and Sarah L. Nash of PilieroMazza PLLC, Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant.

Brian C. Caney, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges SOMERS (Chair), SULLIVAN, and BEARDSLEY.

SOMERS, Board Judge.

This appeal is currently before the Board on a joint motion for judgment on a stipulated settlement. The appeal relates to a claim submitted by appellant, Oneida Communications, Inc. (Oneida), seeking payment of increased costs in the amount of $776,124.92 that Oneida incurred due to a contract modification that retroactively incorporated a wage determination from the U.S. Department of Labor, as well as Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses related to the Service Contract Act of 1965, 41 U.S.C. §§ 6701-6707 (2012). On November 14, 2017, the parties stipulated to an award by this Board to Oneida in the amount of $767,743.91 in full settlement of the claim and the appeal. Both parties stipulate that they will not seek reconsideration of, or relief from the Board’s decision, and they will not appeal the decision.

Decision

Pursuant to the parties’ joint motion and Board Rule 25(b) (48 CFR 6101.25(b)(2016), this appeal is GRANTED. In accordance with the parties’ stipulation of settlement and joint request for board stipulation of settlement amount based on settlement agreement, the Board awards the appellant the sum of $767,743.91 for its claim under the appeal; payment is to be made from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. § 1304. ___________________________ JERI K. SOMERS Board Judge We concur: _______________________________ ______________________________ MARIAN E. SULLIVAN ERICA S. BEARDSLEY Board Judge Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Oneida Communications, Inc., CBCA 5700. 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.

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.