MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED: December 27, 2023
CBCA 7761-R
REAL LION LOGISTICS SERVICES COMPANY,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
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.
Ahmad Farzad, President of Real Lion Logistics Services Company, Kabul, Afghanistan, appearing for Appellant.
Matthew S. Tilghman, Office of the Legal Adviser, Buildings and Acquisitions, Department of State, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges GOODMAN, ZISCHKAU, and CHADWICK.
CHADWICK, Board Judge.
Appellant, Real Lion Logistics Services Company, filed a “statement” in response to the Board’s December 5, 2023, denial of its appeal seeking damages under a purchase order. We construe the statement as a motion for reconsideration under Board Rule 26 (48 CFR 6101.26 (2022)) and deny the motion.
Appellant cites no new law, new evidence, or clear error that warrants reconsideration. See Delaware Valley Floral Group, Inc. v. Shaw Rose Nets, LLC, 597 F.3d 1374, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Instead, appellant writes that our merits decision “is extremely disappointing and disrupts and complicates our livelihoods.” Appellant continues in part: “No doubt you decide according to the rules, but one thing should not be forgotten: . . . Suddenly the Kabul government collapsed and everything fell apart. We once again ask you to please . . . save us from this deeply complex mess . . . .”
Appellant alleges that the Taliban seized its property and threatened and imprisoned its employees. Tribunals may grant reconsideration to “prevent manifest injustice.”
Delaware Valley Floral, 597 F.3d at 1383. Reconsideration to avoid manifest injustice is reserved, however, for cases “where the ‘[tribunal] has patently misunderstood a party, or has made a decision outside of the adversarial issues presented . . . by the parties, or has made an error not of reasoning, but of apprehension.’” Id. at 1384 (quoting Association for Disabled Americans, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 211 F.R.D. 457, 477 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (quoting Z.K. Marine, Inc. v. M/V Archigetis, 808 F. Supp. 1561, 1563 (S.D. Fla. 1992))). The injustice alleged by appellant is different and arises, instead, from the war and a sudden change of government in Afghanistan. As a result, we lack grounds to reconsider our decision denying contractual relief.
Decision
Appellant’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Kyle Chadwick
KYLE CHADWICK
Board Judge
We concur:
Allan H. Goodman
Board Judge
Jonathan D. Zischkau
Board Judge
This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Real Lion Logistics Services Company, CBCA 7761-R. 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.